1ui ii oi moiivi sm

0ivivsi1v oi ov1u c.voii.

s10iiis i 1ui civm.ic i.c0.cis
.i ii1iv.10vis
Initiated by vicu.vi ,i1i (I,,I,,:),
established by i. i. coii (I,,:I,o8),
continued by siiciviii miws (I,o8I,8o),
vicu.vi u. i.wso (I,8oI,8,), and
v.0i 1. vovivci (I,8,:ooo)
,o.1u. m. uiss, Editoi
Publication Committee: Depaitment of Geimanic Languages
I:o ,ou viziv. EgcAlter Egc. Dcuble and/as Other in the Age cf
German Pcetic Realism. I,,8. Pp. xiv, Ioo.
I:I ,iiiviv i. s.mmos. Ideclcgy, Mimesis, Fantasy. Charles Sealseld,
Friedrich Gerstacker, Karl May, and Other German Ncvelists cf
America. I,,8. Pp. xiv, _.
I:: ,.i o. iwm.. The Interventicn cf Philclcgy. Gender, Learning,
and Pcwer in Lchensteins Rcman Plays. :ooo. Pp. xviii, ::8.
I:_ ,.mis i. vo.c .i ci.ivi v.iiwi, iis. The Ccnstructicn cf
Textual Authcrity in German Literature cf the Medieval and Early
Mcdern Pericds. :ooI. Pp. xiv, :,o.
I: wiiii.m coiiis io.u0i. The End cf Mcdernism. Elias
Canettis Autc-da-Fe. :ooI. Pp. xviii, :8_.
Send oideis to:
The Univeisity of Noith Caiolina Piess
P.O. Box ::88, Chapel Hill, NC :,,I,-::88
Foi othei volumes in the Studies see pages :8I8_.
Number One Hundred and Twenty-Fcur
0ivivsi1v oi ov1u c.voii.
s10iiis i 1ui civm.ic i.c0.cis
.i ii1iv.10vis
The End of
Modernism
Elias Canettis Autc-da-Fe
wi iii .m coiii s io.u0i
The Univeisity of Noith Caiolina Piess
Chapel Hill & London :ooI
:ooI Libiaiy of Congiess
The Univeisity of Noith Caiolina Piess Cataloging-in-Publication Data
All iights ieseived Donahue, William Collins.
Manufactuied in the United States of The end of Modeinism : Elias Canettis
Ameiica Auto-da-f [ William Collins Donahue.
p. cm. (Univeisity of Noith Caiolina
The papei in this book meets the studies in the Geimanic languages and
guidelines foi peimanence and duiability liteiatuies , no. I:)
of the Committee on Pioduction Includes bibliogiaphical iefeiences and
Guidelines foi Book Longevity of the index.
Council on Libiaiy Resouices. isv o-8o,8-8I:- (cloth: alk. papei)
I. Canetti, Elias, I,o, Blendung. I. Title.
II. Seiies.
v1:oo,..,8 zo,o :ooI
8__.,I:dc:I
:ooIo_,I,o
o, o o_ o: oI , _ : I
Foi my paients,
Doiothy and John Donahue
Ncch spur ich ihren Atem auf den Vangen.
co1i1s
Pieface xi
Acknowledgments xv
Intioduction: Modeinism in a Dieient Key :
I. The Novel(s) in the Novel:
Modeinism as Paiody of Populai Realism :8
:. The tiuth is youie a woman. You live foi sensations.:
Misogyny as Cultuial Ciitique ,
_. Self-Indulgent Philosophies of the Weimai Peiiod:
The Use and Abuse of Neoempiiicism and Neo-Kantianism ,o
. The Hunchback of Heaven:
Anti-Semitism and the Failuie of Humanism :oo
,. An Impudent Choii of Cioaking Fiogs:
Fieud and the Fieudians as the Novels Seciet Shaieis :,,
o. Neithei Adoino noi Lukcs:
Canettis Analytic Modeinism :,
Notes :o,
Bibliogiaphy :,,
Index :,:
iii0s1v.1ios
I. Title page fiom a tuin-of-the-centuiy edition of Willibald Alexiss
Die Hcsen des Herrn vcn Bredcw :,
:. Jewish men publicly ogle an Aiyan beauty (fiom Kuit Plischke,
Der }ude als Rassenschander) ,:
_. The Maityi Abioad: visual backgiound to Fischeiles escapist fantasy
of Ameiican success (anti-Semitic caitoon fiom Brennessel ) ,:
. Dei kleine CohnThe malfoimed shiikei as Fischeiles cultuial
piototype (Woild Wai Ieia postcaid) ::o
,. The stinking Jew: cultuial ieiteiations of the Fischeile type
(anti-Semitic caiicatuie by Josef Plank) :::
o. This total nose (caiicatuie fiom the anti-Semitic Kikeriki ) :::
,. An anti-Semitic childiens book, Trau keinem Fuchs, teaches lessons on
Jewish and Aiyan physiognomy ::,
8. Blond Geimanic Siegfiied appioaches the dwaif Albeiich
(fiom Fiitz Langs I,: Siegfried) ::o
,. Jewish Metamoiphosis (a caiicatuie of Jewish assimilation as essentially
supeicial) :,:
vvii.ci
Canettis novel nevei fails to elicit iathei stiong opinions. Recently in the
New Ycrker, David Denby declaied it a long, piovocatively odd, and emo-
tionally demanding novel.
1
Remaikable amidst the vaiiety of these dis-
tinctly unambivalent ieactions is the fact that ieadeis have tended to see
Autc-da-Fe as a compellingly contempoiaiy woik, and in one notable case,
even pionounced it a postwai novel.
2
This is an undeistandable eiioi.
Canetti did not ieally gain wide iecognition until the eaily I,oos, when his
quixotic anthiopological study Crcwds and Pcwer ist appeaied. Implicitly
addiessing the Cold Wai stalemate, and hailed as above ideology, this
much-discussed book was bound to encouiage ieadeis to associate Canetti
in the ist instance with the buining issues of that bipolai woild, iathei than
with piewai modeinist ction. Yet placing Canetti the novelist alongside the
likes of such unmistakably postwai wiiteis as Giass, Boll, and Chiista Wolf
was piobably moie than an oveisight. Those who iead and ieviewed the
novel at this time, including those who ceitainly knewof its Weimai-eia oii-
gins (such as Hans Magnus Enzensbeigei), weie in fact quite piepaied to
view it as a woik chiey about contempoiaiy society. It may be that social
ielevance was alieady becoming a dominant ciiteiion of liteiaiy achieve-
ment, even befoie the student movement established it moie imly. And it
may also be that some ciitics simply mistook the date of iepublicationit
was ieissued in the wake of Crcwds and Pcwer in oidei, in pait, to capital-
ize on that books successfoi the oiiginal date. Whatevei the case, nobody
seemed to miss the modeinist context of the eaily I,_os, when Canetti actu-
ally wiote what would be his only published novel.
Theie is moie to this, of couise, than meiely a testimony to the novels
ageless appeal, though this would have pleased Canetti immensely since he
aspiied to nothing moie than to be a wiitei who tianscended his own times.
This episode ieects an impoitant fact about Autc-da-Fe. ieadeis, even lit-
eiaiy ciitics, aie cuiiously disinclined to associate Canettis novel with the
classics of liteiaiy modeinism. Foi this, as I endeavoi to demonstiate, theie
xii : vvii.ci
is veiy good ieason. Though suiely pait of the same anti-iealist tiadition
that embiaces Joyce, Musil, and Rilke, Canetti is indeed stiikingly dieient.
The novels wicked humoi, its analytic postuie, and above all its concein foi
the diminishing public spheie set it fai apait fiom what we would come to
know as aesthetic, oi high modeinism.
In a giaduate seminai on modeinism, I iecall asking about those es-
tianged and woild-weaiy aesthetes, the typical piotagonists of high mod-
einism: How did they navigate theii sccial lives: My question, which aiose
out of my ieading of Autc-da-Fe (a novel, incidentally, that was not on the
couise syllabus), was met with polite disinteiest. As I began to woik my
way into the secondaiy liteiatuie, it occuiied to me that ciitics often only
complicated the mattei by attempting to apply a high modeinist template
that just does not t Autc-da-Fe. And, when the novel failed to measuie up,
they ciedited themselves with having discoveied an eiioi in its concep-
tion. Foitunately, just aiound the time of these musings, a paiadigm shift
occuiiedin the case of Geiman liteiatuie, one that is associated chiey
with Petei Buigei, Russell Beiman, and Andieas Huyssenthat enabled me
to appioach the novel with an eye to its iich social and cultuial context. This
appioach has pioven most fiuitful above all in taking the novel on its own
teims, opening up a vista on a whole aiiay of topics that up to now have
only been addiessed, if at all, in piecemeal fashion.
While this moie capacious viewof modeinism stiuctuies the bulk of this
study, allowing me to tap into Canettis unwaveiing inteiest in social ai-
iangements, it occuiied to me that adheiing to the tiaditional constiuction
of liteiaiy modeinism may, in its own way, piove just as instiuctive. What
ist helped me see the distinctive featuies of Autc-da-Fe, aftei all, was the
maiked ccntrast with aesthetic modeinism. Thus in the nal chaptei of this
study, I tuin back the clock and place Canettis novel in the context of high
modeinism. This exeicise thiows the novel into contiastive ielief, ievealing
moie cleaily than otheiwise possible all the naiiative featuies that compiise
what I have dubbed Canettis tiademaik analytic modeinism.
Readeis familiai with Canettis engaging autobiogiaphy, the evocative
Noith Afiican tiavel memoii, oi his fai-ung anthiopological studyaie typi-
cally stiuck by the bieadth of the authois inteiests, the vaiiety of his ex-
peiience, and the quality of his eiudition. These same expectations aie fully
met in Autc-da-Fe, yet up to this point theie was no book available to guide
the ieadei thiough the iich and complex contexts and inteitexts that make
vvii.ci : xiii
ieading this challenging novel such a iewaiding expeiience. Despite some
valuable monogiaphs on paiticulai aspects of the novel, as well as quite gen-
eial suiveys of Canettis entiie oeuvie, we have lacked a substantial study of
the full iange of topics bioached by the novel: the Fieud satiie, the cultuial
case foi misogyny, the viiulent iacial anti-Semitism in its ielationship to a
failed humanism, and a clustei of philosophical and pseudophilosophical
movements of the inteiwai peiiod.
Though Canettis novel belonged to woild liteiatuie long befoie it was
ieclaimed by Geiman ieadeis in the eaily I,oos, scholaiship has tended to
favoi the Geiman ieadeiship. I will attempt to seive two masteis: both the
geneialist who knows the novel as Autc-da-Fe in the oidinaiily quite ex-
cellent Wedgwood tianslation, as well as the moie specialized Geimanist,
who will want to examine the oiiginal text in the context of my analysis.
In oidei to accomplish both tasks I have aiiived at the following solution: I
have tianslated all quotations (oi used available standaid editions) fiomthe
secondaiy liteiatuie, including Fieud, Adoino, and Lukcs. Foi the novel
itself, which is the piincipal object of my study, I have piovided both the
English (which in not a fewcases iepiesents my ievision of Wedgwood) and
Canettis Geiman oiiginal. While this may seempedantic and cumbeisome,
it will, I think, piove woithwhile. Foi when it comes to humoi and nuance,
of which Canetti is an acknowledged mastei, even a talented tianslation can
usually only captuie one of an aiiay of semantic options available in the
oiiginal. Most of my alteinate iendeiings appeai, peihaps unsuipiisingly,
within the discussions of misogyny and anti-Semitism, topics which weie
not aiiedso openly inWedgwoods day. Takentogethei, theie nowappeais to
be enough evidence that this peisonally supeivised tianslation, while still
of enoimous value, cannot in fact have been line-edited by Canetti himself.
My inteiest in making this study of Autc-da-Fe available also to the non-
specialist and students of compaiative liteiatuie has much to dowith Canetti
himself. Rogei Kimball captuies peifectly the intiinsic dual thiust of this
enteipiise when he desciibes Canettis woiks as sciupulously avant-gaide
yet laige enough in theii ambition to command mainstieam ciitical atten-
tion.
3
One of the things that makes Canetti so continually attiactive is that
he iepiesents an ideal to which so many of us still, if only coveitly, aspiie
namely, that of the nonspecialist polymath. Theie may be no moie memo-
iable a skeweiing of academic oveispecialization and pomposity in all of
woild liteiatuie than that which we nd in Autc-da-Fe. Yet this is cleaily not
xiv : vvii.ci
to be iead as an anti-intellectual stance. On the contiaiy, Canetti steadfastly
maintained that it is possible to be a seiious intellectual geneialist with-
out necessaiily devolving into a dilettante. The eoit, at least, is necessaiy,
Canetti felt, lest in oui diive to mastei detail we lose sight of the laigei so-
cial good. And those who aie pieoccupied with theii own naiiow specialty
become vulneiable, as the novel unfoigettably suggests, to the powei giabs
of the less sciupulous. Though Autc-da-Fe meicilessly ciitiques acquisitive
bouigeois notions of Geiman cultivation (Bildung), Canetti himself ie-
deemsand iefashionsthe concept in his own liteiaiy-intellectual caieei.
It is my hope, theiefoie, to eniich the ieading expeiience of the moie gen-
eial ieadei, even as I engage my colleagues in faiily specic debates about
the novels complex ielationship to the inteiwai peiiod of Austiian and Gei-
man cultuie, tiaditional liteiaiy modeinism, and Canettis own considei-
able body of social thought.
.cxowiiicmi1s
I have pioted immensely fiom all those who iead the manusciipt, oi paits
theieof, at vaiious stages along the way. My sinceie thanks to Russell Bei-
man, Richaid Biinkman, Doiiit Cohn, Alfied Dopplei, Eiic Downing, San-
dei L. Gilman, Geihaid von Giaevinitz, Steven Giossman, Kail S. Guthke,
Waltei Haug, Noah Isenbeig, Richaid S. Levy, Sylvia Schmitz-Buigaid, Wal-
tei H. Sokel, and Haiiy Zohn. I wish to thank in paiticulai Stephen Dowden
and Maiia Tatai, who iead the manusciipt in the nal phase on its way to
becoming a book. If my aigument has since become any shaipei, it is due
to theii attentive ciiticism and geneious commentaiy.
I completed the ievisions on this book while a fellow at the Eiasmus In-
stitute (Univeisity of Notie Dame), and wish to iecoid heie a note of sin-
ceie giatitude to that institutionand to its diiectois, James C. Tuinei and
Robeit E. Sullivanfoi a geneious yeai of ieseaich, wiiting, and stimulat-
ing inteidisciplinaiy discussion. I am indebted also to the UNC Piess seiies
editoi, Di. Jonathan Hess, and to editoiial assistant Elizabeth Davis, both
foi expeit editoiial guidance and patient elding of many anxious queiies.
The Koiet Foundation (San Fiancisco), the Littauei Foundation (New
Yoik), and the Rutgeis Reseaich Council (New Biunswick) made geneious
contiibutions to suppoit the publication of this book, and I am giateful to
each. Chaptei : ist appeaied in a slightly dieient foim in the Deutsche
Vierteljahrsschrift fur Literatur und Geistesgeschichte, Decembei I,,,.
Most impoitant of all, I wish to thank my familyMaiie, Molly, and
Oliviafoi theii love, suppoit, and patience thioughout this pioject.
1ui ii oi moiivi sm
Nobody can wiite as wickedly as you.
(So bos wie Sie kann niemand schieiben.)
Fiiedl Benedikt to Elias Canetti
Intioduction
Modeinism in a Dieient Key
Autc-da-Fe is a biutal book.
Rogei Kimball
1
Aftei ieading Autc-da-Fe Heimann Bioch asked Canetti: What aie
you tiying to say: Befoie the visibly stunned Canetti could ieply, Bioch
continued, somewhat apologetically: If you knew that, you wouldnt have
wiitten the novel. That was a bad question.
2
Yet it is the question that
has occupied ieadeis evei since the novel was ist published in I,_,. To
lay out my own answei, I have had to wiite this book, yet it can be stated
simply: Autc-da-Fe is piofoundly conceined with the diminution of the so-
cial woild. The blinding of the novels oiiginal Geiman title, Die Blendung,
iefeis in the ist place to the blocking out of social ieality that manifests
itself peisonally, but is in each case emblematic of a laigei cultuial piactice.
The novel evokes and hilaiiously debunks a whole seiies of cultuial stiate-
gies that addiess social ciises laigely by, as the Geimans say, thinking
them away (wegdenken). These evasions take vaiious foims, ianging fiom
a childs magical thinking (if I dont see you, youie not theie) to the moie
subtle vaiiety Canetti aliates with escapist liteiatuie, populai philosophy,
and, not least of all, Sigmund Fieud. It was Canettis deepest ambition to
become the kind of authoi whose woik, which, though peihaps not fully
appieciated in its own day, would one day nd lasting iecognition. This as-
piiation may well be met in Autc-da-Fe. Foi though it should in the ist
instance be seen as iesponding to paiticulai cultuial ciises of the Weimai
eia, as I will showat some length in this study, it would be dicult to name
one object of the novels paiody that is not in some mannei with us still.
What makes ieading Canetti an exciting adventuie is the fact that the pei-
spectives he develops aie nevei deiivative and iaiely expected, which pei-
haps accounts foi some of the cuiious inteipietations I will addiess below.
Misogyny and iacial anti-Semitism come undei ie, theiefoie, not foi the
: : i 1voi0c1i o
obvious ieason that such piactices aie unjust. In fact, Canetti even exploits
these topics foi humoia fact that may explain why so many ieadeis admit
only piivately to laughing out loud while ieading this novel. What pioves
to be so laughable (though not funny in the sense of tiivial enteitain-
ment) is the intiicate way in which misogyny is shown to be implicated in
the much-heialded ciisis of subjectivity. Well befoie it was fashionable to
do so, Autc-da-Fe poitiays this classic event in high modeinismotheiwise
known as the fiagmented subjectas a suspiciously gendeied aaii that
is not meiely a peisonal, but a decidedly widespiead cultural malaise. Like-
wise anti-Semitism: it does not iequiie gieat heimeneutic skill to deciphei
Fischeile (a majoi guie in Book : of the novel) as an icon of peiveise anti-
Semitic steieotyping. Yet Canetti complicates this issue by ielating the fate
of this hunchbacked Jewish pimp to the laigei failuie of humanism, indeed
of the entiie enlightenment pioject of cultuie as it was iesuscitated in a
paiticulai way duiing the Weimai peiiod.
At stake is not meiely the ecacy of such peculiaily Geiman enteipiises
as Bildung and Kultur, theie aie, of couise, moie specic taigets. While the
biotheis Kien exhibit behavioi that is peihaps most uncomfoitably famil-
iai to academics of oui own day, they happen to iepiesent specic aspects
of two notable Weimai-eia philosophical schools, neoempiiicism and neo-
Kantianism. Petei Kien (iefeiied to hencefoith simply as Kien) is the most
obvious culpiit because he makes no seciet of his cultuial elitism. In his fa-
mous Uber die asthetische Erziehung des Menschen in einer Reihe vcn Briefen
(Aesthetic Letteis, I,,,), peihaps the quintessential Geiman document of
idealist aesthetics, Fiiediich Schillei had espoused a model of cultuie that
would haimonize the iequiiements of the autonomous Kantian subject with
the demands of the sensual and contingent social woild. Though Kien claims
to be an aident paitisan of this lofty cultuial heiitage, his piofessed love of
Kant tuins out to be little moie than a specious justication foi ietieat and
isolation fiom a dauntingly modein woild. Though the ivoiy towei syn-
diome is indeed a peiennial, if not univeisal, phenomenon, we will see that
Kiens idealism takes on a specically Weimai foim. As a noted philolo-
gistindeed, the woilds most famous such specimenhe invokes piecisely
that discipline that was to play such a ciucial iole in Weinei Jageis inteiwai
cultuial ienewal piogiamknown as the Thiid Humanism. Needless to say,
Kiens piactice of scholaiship gives us little hope of cultuial iejuvenation
fiom this quaitei. Biothei Geoig is suiely the moie insidious of intellectual
i 1voi0c1i o : _
fiauds, not in the least because he appeais to be the sanest and most attiac-
tive of chaiacteis. He avidly seeks to poitiay himself as politically engaged
by piomoting his innovative psychological methods as subveisively anti-
bouigeois. But no less than his eldei biothei, Geoig wiaps himself in con-
tempoiaiy philosophical gaib only to escape the veiy social woild he claims
to advocate. With these two highly educated biotheis, Canetti ieminds us
howseductive fashionable modes of thought can be, and howeasily they can
be employed to mask hidden (as well as not so well concealed) agendas.
All of these constiuctions of cultuie aie hilaiiously doomed: the pulp c-
tion that fosteis nostalgic ietieat into a national histoiy that nevei quite was
(an issue Canetti ingeniously inteicuts by alluding to the then-bestselling
novelist Willibald Alexis), no less than the veneiation of an impeiial
Vienna that has been ieduced to a spectial and insubstantial piesence. In
fact, the only tiuly duiable municipal edice in the whole novel tuins out to
be the Theiesianum, a building designed to evoke the economic disloca-
tions andcultuial contiadictions of the inteiwai yeais like noothei Viennese
landmaik possibly could. Autc-da-Fe leaves little doubt about what does not
woik. Neithei tuining back the clock (as Kien and company would have it)
noi mindlessly chasing aftei the latest intellectual fad (as Geoig does) will
suce as a foundationfoi the cultuial ienaissance the novel suggests we need
so uigently.
Whence cometh oui salvation: Once again, it is to Heimann Bioch that
we tuin foi common sense. He obseived, quite coiiectly I think, that the
novel ends in total destiuction, haish and meiciless. Biochs penchant foi
answeiing his own questions is in evidence in the following queiy. Refeiiing
to the novels iathei bleak conclusion, he asks Canetti: Doyou want this col-
lapse: It is evident that you desiie piecisely the opposite. You would gladly
do youi pait to indicate a way out. But you dont show us any.
3
The novel
does not infact containthe answei to the questionof cultuie and society it so
complexly and ielentlessly iaises. Yet this point has eluded many ciitics, pai-
ticulaily in the last thiity-ve yeais. And foi this Canetti himself must take
some of the iesponsibility. Foi that which has cieated so much confusion is
of couise the authois second majoi woik, Crcwds and Pcwer (I,oo). Evei
since the publication of this quiiky and voluminous anthiopological study,
the novel has tended to be eithei iigoiously segiegated fiom it oi ielegated
to a secondaiy, illustiative status. The foimei appioach has been advocated
by foimalists such as David Daiby, Robeit Elbaz, and Leah Hadomi, but
: i 1voi0c1i o
howevei much we stand to gain (and we undoubtedly gain the most fiom
Daiby), this peispective tends to neglect the novels chief concein.
Theie has of couise been no deaith of ciitics who iead Autc-da-Fe in
light of Crcwds and Pcwer. But while the social dimension is theieby ies-
cued, anothei distoition inevitably aiises: the novel is consigned to the un-
likely iole of anticipating the latei social scientic theoiy. Ciitics of this
school ioutinely cite the novel to illustiate a point made moie discuisively
in Crcwds and Pcwer, and that point is often (and iathei piedictably) that
Geoig, oi at least his piotean conception of ciowds, bespeaks Canettis own
ideas on the piimal natuie of social gioupingsone of the foundational
ideas of Crcwds and Pcwer. But iaielydo these ciitics pause to notice that this
is an essentially ciiculai endeavoi that accomplishes little except, peihaps,
to attiibute what I judge to be an unlikely degiee of unifoimity to Canettis
thought. Despite the fact that Geoigs ciedibility has moie and moie come
undei ie in the last twenty yeais, this fundamental heimeneutic stiategy
has pioved astonishingly tenacious. Geiald Stieg exemplies this appioach
most iecently in suggesting that the novel be iead as a kind of encoded
fable foi the fundamental ideas of Crcwds and Pcwer.
My own appioach is quite dieient. I believe we can have it both ways,
without splitting the dieience. We can iead Autc-da-Fe as the Geiman
modeinist novel with an inheiently social agenda without ieducing it to
the status of piooftext in the seivice of Crcwds and Pcwer. Foi one, Canetti
ceitainly did not know in I,_o_I what he would leain ovei the next thiity
yeais. To assume he did is, I think, the pioposition iequiiing the gieatei leap
of faith. One could also point to the autobiogiaphy (still the most popu-
lai of all the authois woiks, by the way) to suppoit this view, though I am
conscious that this inteipietive maneuvei can easily function like the cita-
tion of sciiptuie. Even as I wiite this line, I can imagine Canetti acionados
ieady to pounce with passages fiom the autobiogiaphy wheie we iead that
the authois inteiest in ciowds dates to the same peiiod in which the novel
was wiitten, oi eagei to cite chaptei and veise fiomthe same woik wheie we
leain that the I,:, iiot and subsequent massacie at the Viennese Palace of
Justice weie seminal histoiical events that infoim both of these woiks. This
much may well be tiue, I see no ieason, at any iate, to doubt Canettis woid
on this. But what he is claiming, it should be noted, is not that Crcwds and
Pcwer piovides the theoietical key to Autc-da-Fe (as Hans Magnus En-
zensbeigei claimed in his Der Spiegel ieview of I,o_), but iathei that these
i 1voi0c1i o : ,
two woiks aie inhabited by a common spiiit of inquiiy. This, at any iate, is
the foimulation that best captuies theii actual ielationship.
Since I ambucking a tiadition that has dominated Canetti scholaiship,
4
it
seems woithwhile, even in this intioduction, to say a few moie woids about
my conception of this ielationship. Giasping the novels tiue ielationship to
Crcwds and Pcwer is in fact pieiequisite to compiehending Autc-da-Fe in its
own iight and on its own teims. Without wishing to aliate myself all too
closely with the pompous philologist Kien (who, let us iecall, pioposes in
all seiiousness to wiite an authoiitative and iiievocable exegesis of the New
Testament), I do hope with this book to lay to iest the single issue that has
most bedeviled Canetti scholaiship. Autc-da-Fe no moie anticipates Crcwds
and Pcwer than it does the Nazi peiiod (anothei iecuiient claim in the lit-
eiatuie). Rathei, it compiises a complex ciitique of obsolete, ineectual, and
even ieactionaiy ways of fending o modeinity, it exposes a whole seiies of
cultuial piactices as essentially subjectivist, escapist, and theiefoie funda-
mentally antisocial, and it piovides a staik peispective on modein cultuie
that unspaiingly discloses all those things that mitigate against a tenable ie-
newal of cultuie. But Autc-da-Fe does not yet piovide the answei it seeks.
Maitin Jay has iepeatedly adduced Adoinos iesidual Judaism as a signi-
cant factoi in the development of his famous negative dialectic. The biblical
injunction against divine images may have played some ciucial iole, Jay sug-
gests, in Adoinos adamant iefusal to piovide positive, aimative piecepts.
5
Asimilai case could be made foi Canetti, at least up to the point when he de-
velops his notion of Verwandlung. Foi, like Adoino, he was an atheist Jew
who iemained stubboinly inteiested in Judaism (and fascinated by ieligion
in geneial) thioughout his life. But whethei it was this factoi alone, the dic-
tates and limitations of the ctional liteiaiy foim, oi the fact that he simply
did not yet know wheie his investigations would take him (oi, moie likely,
some dynamic combination theieof ), of one thing we can be suie: Autc-
da-Fe negates bogus notions of public cultuie without oeiing anything to
ieplace what Bioch teimed this total destiuction.
Entei Crcwds and Pcwer. Though the piesent study iemains piimaiily
conceined with Autc-da-Fe, I aigue, paiticulaily in the nal two chapteis,
that the moie accuiate ielationship between these two lifes woiks is dia-
logic: the novel poses the gieat question, to which the anthiopological study
wageis a tentative, but passionately aigued, answei. In shoit, Crcwds and
Pcwer ieplaces the noimative model of Geiman Kultur, so iichly pilloiied in
o : i 1voi0c1i o
the novel, with an anthiopological concept of cultuie. Such a move would
of couise have appalled idealist cultuial conseivatives like Kien, who viewed
this appioach (which was alieady widely discussed in the Weimai peiiod) as
dangeiously ielativistic, oi woise, mindlessly histoiicist. Aftei all, they iea-
soned, what do the piimitive cultuies have to say to that owei of Euiopean
civilization, Geiman Kultur? How could they seive as a font of cultuial ie-
newal: Aftei the Second Woild Wai and the Holocaust, Canetti would face
less diculty in making his case. In opposition to that heietofoie most inu-
ential thinkei on ciowds, Sigmund Fieud, Canetti develops essentially two
ideas that seive as bookends to Crcwds and Pcwer. the piimaiy quality of so-
cial gioupings (not, as Fieud would have it, a secondaiy phenomenon essen-
tiallyat odds withindividual happiness), anda majoi ievisionof the Oedipus
complex that Canetti calls Verwandlung (tiansfoimation). Both of these
aie faiily detailed concepts woithy of theii own discussion, which I undei-
take below. But the point foi nowwould be to note that the novel has alieady
paved the way piecisely foi these conceptual innovations. In the penultimate
chaptei, I seek to show how Fieud (and populaiized Fieudianism) was al-
ieady an impoitant inteitext foi the novel. Canettis uniemitting caiicatuie
of Fieudian notions, which unsuipiisingly centeis on the novels psychia-
tiist Geoig, iaises topics undeniably similai to those we will encountei in the
latei Canetti, namely issues of social oiganization and individual tiansfoi-
mative potential, but in a stiikingly dieient mannei. As it tuins out, Geoig
is the piomotei of notions that aie not only debunked in the novel, but also
specically supeiseded in the latei anthiopological woik.
Though I woik haid to oveicome the fuzzy anachionistic thinking that
ieads the lattei woik into the foimei, neithei do I wish to suggest that the
woiks aie iadically dieient. The most obvious connection between the two
is Canettis enduiing inteiest in powei as an inteisubjective, social piactice,
as well as his acute concein foi an impeiiled social woild. It is this pio-
nounced social oiientation that maiks Autc-da-Fe as distinctive, indeed as
an endpcint, in the Geiman modeinist tiadition. It should be stiessed that
this is not meiely a chionological mattei of Autc-da-Fe appeaiing at the
end of the gieat novelistic output of Geiman modeinism (ioughly I,Io
_o), though this fact cannot be entiiely ignoied since it piovided Canetti the
tempoial vantage point to look back on, and ieact to, eailiei developments
in the Geiman novel. Neithei can we doubt that the young Canetti was any-
thing but acutely awaie of such matteis. Knowing full well wheie to tuin
i 1voi0c1i o : ,
in these matteis, Canetti sent o the novel in manusciipt foim to Thomas
Mann. (Mann ietuined the bulky, unsolicited package without even having
bioken the seal, though once Autc-da-Fe appeaied in piint, he piaised it
piofusely.)
One can undoubtedly give a political ieading to Rilkes Die Aufzeich-
nungen des Malte Laurids Brigge (Notebooks of Malte Lauiids Biigge, I,Io),
and it is ceitainly tiue that a menacing Beilin plays a ciucial iole in Doblins
Berlin Alexanderplatz (I,:,), but it is in Autc-da-Fe that we ist encountei
a fundamental challenge to that time-honoied xtuie of aesthetic modein-
ism, the fiagmented subject, who often takes the foim of a sympathetically
diawn, oveisensitive aesthete mistone thinks, foi example, of Rilkes
Malte, Musils Toile (Die Verwirrungen des Zcglings Tcrle, I,oo), oi even
of Biochs own Pasenow (Pasencw, cder Die Rcmantik :888, I,_o). In the last
chaptei I aigue that the novels deance of what would become the iegnant
paiadigm of postwai modeinism, most paiticulaily in its iigoious exami-
nation of the social dimensions of fiagmented subjectivity, explains in pait
why it was latei maiginalized by academic ciitics. Yet befoie this model of
high modeinism installed itself as noimative undei the aegis above all of
Adoino, ciitics had no diculty in iecognizing Autc-da-Fe as self-evidently
modeinist. Indeed, it was one of the canaids of the eaily ciiticism to ali-
ate Canettis expeiimental novel with that touchstone of modeinism, Joyces
Ulysses. And this is a connection latei jouinalist ciitics would continue to
make down to oui own day.
6
Yet because it tieats that sacied cowof aesthetic
modeinism with ciitical ieseive, scholaily ciitics would withhold theii im-
piimatui.
The second way in which Autc-da-Fe iings in an end to the high mod-
einist tiadition is via its deployment of a naiiative stiuctuie that elicits and
enables analysis. The piesence of an epistemologically stiong naiiative,
which I explicate also in the nal chaptei, would necessaiily seem alien to
those iaised on a diet of canonical aesthetic modeinism. Yet this need not
signify a ieactionaiy oi iegiessive move, as some ciitics imply, especially if
one consideis that the novel does not simply mock one peispective (Kiens)
in oidei to install anothei (Geoigs). The ciitique is leveled evenhandedly
acioss the boaid, as I show at some length thioughout this study. It is a
haish and piobing seiies of negations, not a know it all novel that con-
tains its own standaid of good behavioinot, in othei woids, a case of c-
tional Besserwisserei. The novels notable analytic piopensity is an essen-
8 : i 1voi0c1i o
tial chaiacteiistic that can, howevei, all too easily obscuie the simultaneous
self-ciitique of ieason enacted within the text. Indeed, if we aie left with any
single impiession, it is that epistemological hubiis, both the ieadeis and the
chaiacteis, will inevitably be punished.
Neveitheless, we shouldnot shyaway fiomthe fact that Autc-da-Fe iepie-
sents a iuptuie in liteiaiy modeinism, confionting the aesthetic (oi high)
canon with what I have dubbed a vaiiant stiain of analytic modeinism.
To nd a suitable analogythat is, a self-ciitical aesthetic piogiam imbued
with a modicum of analytic condence that is focused intensely on the so-
cial woildone would have to step outside the genie to include Biechtian
diama (and diamatic theoiy). But within the eld of Geiman piose modein-
ism, Canettis Autc-da-Fe stands in this iegaid conspicuously alone. Which
evokes a second and impoitant level of continuity in Canettis oeuvie: both
the eaily novelistic ciitique and the latei anthiopological iehabilitation of
cultuie depend upon a fundamental allegiance to the enlightenment
values of inquiiy. Canettis desciiption of Crcwds and Pcwer in the I,o,
inteiviewwith Adoino (which I discuss below) epitomizes this position pei-
fectly: his pioject, he maintains, iepiesents an open systembut a sys-
tem nonetheless. The evils of Nazism and the Holocaust and the thieat of
Cold Wai nucleai annihilationthe ieal motivating foices behind Crcwds
and Pcwer, by the waydemand a compiehensive ievision of tiaditional-
ist Euiopean cultuie as well as a deep humility in the face of othei, non-
Euiopean piimitive cultuies. Hackneyed idealist notions of high cultuie,
which imagine the Geiman classics as an unpioblematic wellspiing of noi-
mative social valuesa concept, by the way, veiy similai to that pioeied
in William Bennetts bestselling Bcck cf Virtueswill simply no longei do.
This dynamic combination of qualities we encountei in the novelicono-
clastic cultuial ciitique conjoined with a commitment to analytic discouise
is in fact chaiacteiistic of the entiie oeuvie. Canetti was to iemain a skepti-
cal iationalist thioughout his life. Like Biechts stance towaid Stalins Soviet
UnionCiitical, but fcr it
7
Canetti aimed iational ciitique as awed
but necessaiy. With this in mind, we can undeistand why those liteiaiy-
ciitical paiadigms piedicated upon iadical epistemological skepticism(I am
thinking above all of deconstiuctionism) aie ec ipsc bound to miss (oi dis-
miss) Canettis distinctive contiibution.
Did the young Canetti intend to put an end to aesthetic modeinism:
Cleaily, he made no seciet eithei of his own iathei immodest aitistic ambi-
i 1voi0c1i o : ,
tion to make it new (as Ezia Pound uiged his geneiation), oi of his dis-
dain foi commeicially successful contempoiaiy wiiteis like Stefan Zweig,
Fianz Weifel, and Cail Zuckmayei. Yet it would be mistaken, I think, to con-
ne oui discussion stiictly to liteiatuie, oi to think of these innovations in
piimaiily liteiaiy-aesthetic teims. Canetti ciitiques the sympathetic viewof
the fiagmented modeinist subject and stiuctuies his novel analytically foi
fundamentally pclitical ieasons. As an assimilated Sephaidic Jew, boin to a
Ladino-speaking family in the small town of Rustschuk on the outskiits of
the Austio-Hungaiian empiie, Canetti undeistood well that in ieinventing
ones self a whole lot moie may be at stake than an aesthetes inteiioi life.
Canetti, I am suggesting, was biogiaphically piedisposed to undeistand the
modeinist decenteied self as a potential pioblem, not something to be cele-
biated unciitically. Accoidingly, Autc-da-Fe sounds a waining: If a self is
ieduced to a meie bundle of sensations (as Einst Mach famously aigued),
then might it not become vulneiable to anotheis self-aggiandizement: If
the peiceiving subject becomes paiamount, might that not iendei the iest of
us moie oi less mutable objects of anotheis peiception and powei: Maybe
these fiagmented subjects weie supposed to eiode at piecisely the same
iate, giving no one an advantage ovei anothei, but Autc-da-Fe suggests that
exactly this is nct the case.
The signicance of Jewish identity is of couise not meiely a mattei of
biogiaphical speculation, but cential to the novel. The self that Siegfiied
Fischeile despeiately wants to shed is, not coincidentally, a steieotypically
Jewish one. The fact that he cannot ieinvent himself while the highly cul-
tuied Geoig can enact any numbei of metamoiphoses amounts to a giave
indictment of a cultuial piogiam that only claimed to be univeisally ac-
cessible. As a politically astute Jew whose own assimilation to Geiman cul-
tuie was about to be ievokedAutc-da-Fe was published the same yeai the
Nuiembeig Laws weie issuedCanetti was veiy much awaie both of the
politics of fiagmented subjectivity and of the dangeis of iiiationalism.
Todesciibe Canetti as essentially political iequiies animmediate caveat,
foi his was an intellectuals concein iathei than an activists engagement.
This aspect of Canetti can best be gleaned (as can numeious otheis) fiom
the authois encomiastic poitiait of Di. Isaiah Sonne (known peihaps to
some ieadeis undei the pseudonymAbiahambenYitzchak) which he diaws
in The Play cf the Eyes. Sonne had given up his woildly activities . . . But
he remained in the woild, cleaved to its eveiy appeaiance in his thoughts.
Io : i 1voi0c1i o
He let his hands iest, yet he did not tuin his back on the woild, even in the
measuied justice of his speech one could sense a passion foi this woild.
8
Cleaily this is the way Canetti would have us think of him: intellectually ie-
moved, yet passionately committed. While he cleaily hoped to inteivene in
actual sociocultuial debates by means of his wiiting, one senses in Canetti
a concomitant belief in the essential moial goodness of intellectual eneigy
expended on behalf of the woild.
Autc-da-Fe paitakes of the moial seiiousness that chaiacteiizes all of
Canettis woik, yet it does not lack foi iich comedy. In fact, Canetti evinces
a gieat sense of humoi about Autc-da-Fe as well as himself in one episode
fiomThe Play cf the Eyes, wheie he desciibes how the novel ultimately came
to be published. He had expeiienced not a little diculty in nding a pub-
lishei, in gieat pait, no doubt, due to the Nazi piosciiption of degeneiate
ait (entartete Kunst), which by I,__ eliminated all the Geiman publisheis.
But pait of the pioblem suiely also had to do with the fact that the novel
makes substantial demands upon its ieadeis. Finally, a wealthy newspapei
publishei, a ceitain Jean Hoepnei of Stiasbouig, stepped foiwaid with an
oei to put up the necessaiy subvention. Hoepneis iationale foi backing
the book has nothing to do with the high-minded aiguments I have been
explicating thus fai. Quite the opposite: he thinks the novel will enhance the
status quo by making ieadeis giateful that they do not actually inhabit a
woild quite so bleak as that of Autc-da-Fe. Aftei heaiing Canettis isum
of the novel, Hoepnei iesponds: I will nevei iead that. But such a book
should be available. That would have a good eect. Those who iead it would
awake as if fiom a nightmaie and be giateful that ieality is othei than this
dieam.
9
Canetti goes on to explain that since Hoepnei was iepulsed by
the veiy desciiption, and could not ieally suppoit the novel foi its actual
content, he Hoepnei] thought up a pedagogical intention foi the exis-
tence of the novel: that of deteiience.
10
In iecounting this episode, Canetti
betiays not only a iaie self-depiecating sense of humoi, but indicates also
the Achilles heel of all political liteiatuie, namely ieception. Even the most
committed piece of piose could be disaimed by a mind-set like Hoepneis
and coopted as socially aimative ait. Heie Canetti admits that his own as-
piiations foi the novel, which he hoped would piovoke iathei than pacify
his ieadeis, aie cleaily beyond the novelists contiol.
Moie impoitant, peihaps, than Canettis sense of humoi abcut the novel
is the novels own humoi, an aspect of the novel that was tiumpeted by the
i 1voi0c1i o : II
eaily ciitics, paiticulaily in the English piess. If latei Geiman ciitics tended
to pass ovei this salient aspect of Autc-da-Fe, the Biitish ieviewei Waltei
Allen did not hesitate to biand it feiociously funny and its authoi a gieat
comic wiitei.
11
It seems likely that the novels noted humoi was at loggei-
heads with the dominant existentialist ieadings of high modeinism, an issue
we will ievisit in the nal chaptei of this study. Rudolf Haitung, foi example,
was appaiently unable both to lament the novels depiction of the iiieveis-
ible loneliness of the individual in an atomized woild and see the humoi.
12
But Allenalong with many othei ieadeisdid. His judgment of the novel
as a tiuly savage comedy
13
at once points upwhat is unique about Canettis
biand of modeinism, and suggests a liteiaiy heiitage la Heiniich Heine
and Fiiediich Nietzsche, oi, as Geiald Stieg has suggested foi the Austiian
context, la Raimund, Nestioy, and Kail Kiaus.
14
Reading the novel as a
gieat woik of satiie, as Allen does,
15
will iequiie that we call into question
ceitain epistemological assumptions about liteiaiy modeinism.
By the time Heibeit Reichnei published Autc-da-Fe in I,_,, at the piod-
ding, appaiently, of Stefan Zweig, the ideological climate had alieady be-
come hostile to an expeiimental novel. The Anschlu of I,_8 ensuied that
the novels designation as degeneiate extended to Austiia as well. Aftei
the wai, the Veilag Willi Weismann biought it out again, but this small pub-
lishing house sueied a gieat loss duiing the cuiiency iefoim and soon
went bankiupt, leaving stacks of unsold stock inWeismanns basement.
16
By
the late foities Canettis novel enjoyed a wide piess iesponse in a bioad
spectiumof newspapeis and peiiodicals in England,
17
thanks to the Wedg-
wood tianslation, which Canetti supeivised, and even gaineied the coveted
Prix Internaticnal foi the best foieign novel in Fiance. But in the Geiman-
speaking countiies it iemained viitually unknown until its I,o_ ieappeai-
ance, now in the Hansei Veilag.
Reading the novel aftei the Second Woild Wai piompted inteipietations
both ahistoiical and pseudohistoiical. Reviewing the novel in I,,, Philip
Toynbee counsels us, in a tone a pieachei might take to uige his congiega-
tion to apply a sciiptuial passage to theii lives, to accept the depiction of
Petei Kien as an image of oui daikei selves. Canetti uses madness, Toyn-
bee admonishes, to isolate and intensify the obsessive elements in all of
us. Hypociite ieadei, he is foievei insisting, this is ycu, yes, this disgust-
ing, insane cieatuie who makes you diaw up youi skiits, is you youiself.
18
In exhoiting us to look into the distoiting miiioi of the liteiaiy giotesque,
I: : i 1voi0c1i o
Toynbee has fastened upon one of the novels most memoiable subjects, the
academic paiody, the meaning and humoi of which can be giasped with-
out making any special demands on the ieadei. The iesilience of this take
on the novel can be seen in the iemaiks of Geimanys leading jouinalist-
liteiaiy ciitic. Speaking in I,8, about Canettis Hauptweik (main woik),
Maicel Reich-Ranicki summed up the novel in the following mannei: It is
a giand design conceining the tiagedy of the intellectual in oui centuiy, a
paiable of the highest ambition.
19
Such a ieading still has a good deal of
appeal, even if we do not paiticulaily wish to see ouiselves in the image of
the eccentiic piotagonist. The leftist social ciitic and poet Hans Magnus En-
zensbeigei contiibuted to this univeisalizing, moializing mode of ciiticism.
But, as might be expected, Enzensbeigei switches oui attention fiom the
peisonal to the social: The novels depiction of insanity has, as Enzensbeigei
claimed in a Der Spiegel ieview of I,o_, eveiymans face, and the battles,
which aie fought out in the slums and tenements, thiow o giant histoiical
shadows. Canetti shows the ubiquity of paianoid stiuctuies.
20
Side by side with the univeisalizing gestuies of Toynbee and Enzens-
beigei appeais what I would call the pseudohistoiical appioach, taken by
those ciitics who see in the novel a piophecy of Nazism. Usually this takes
the foimof viewing the nal scene of the novel in which Kien enacts his self-
immolation as a foieshadowing of the Nazi book buining of May Io, I,__.
21
While it is suiely tenable to maintain that Canetti, who visited Beilin twice
in the yeais just befoie he wiote the novel, iepiesents some piotofascistic
tendencies, such as the intellectuals inabilityoi iefusalto iecognize the
biute and muideious foice of a Benedikt Pfa, any moie diiect an analogy
simply oveiieaches. We would do well in this iegaid to heed Canettis own
woids. In one of the iaie passages in the autobiogiaphy wheie we encountei
faiily specic iefeiences to political events, Canetti obseives: At the end of
Januaiy Hitlei came to powei. Fiom this moment on eveiything that fol-
lowed this event seemed uncanny and foieboding. Eveiything aected me
peisonally . . . but] nothing had been foieseen. Explanations and specula-
tion, even the boldest of piophesies, appeaied like meie stiaw when mea-
suied against ieality. What happened was in eveiy detail unexpected and
new.
22
The inteipietive stiategy that views the novel as haibingei of Nazism
fails theiefoie to peisuade not only because it asks us to see Canetti as a
foitune-tellei (an assumption his autobiogiaphy cleaily does not beai out),
but also because it piomotes the viewof Kien as sympathetic victim. But the
i 1voi0c1i o : I_
destiuction of Kiens woild is not so much lamented as celebiated in Autc-
da-Fe. The buining of Viennas gieatest piivate libiaiy does iepiesent a
cultuial disastei of the highest oideiand one keenly felt by Canetti him-
selfbut neveitheless one of a wholly dieient oidei than that instigated
by the Nazis. In shoit, this pseudohistoiical view of the novel as piophecy
of Nazism is one of those heimeneutic shoitcuts that does justice neithei to
histoiy noi to the novel.
The End cf Mcdernism. Elias Canettis Autc-da-Fe comes at a time when
neoconseivative ciitic Haiiiet Muiphy would have us believe that Canetti
actually advocates the ivoiy towei intellectual.
23
Peihaps such confusion
aiises, as I have intimated above, because Canetti espoused a moie genteel
conception of intellectual engagement with the woild than that which today
enjoys wide cuiiency. He ceitainly iepiesents a standaid of eiudition that
would be haid to maintain in the face of day-to-day political activism. It
should also be stated that his noted ciitique of powei may actually have pie-
vented himfiomenteiing the iough and tumble of political agitationmay,
in othei woids, have pioved somewhat self-defeating. While this obseiva-
tion opens the dooi to a moie ciitical peispective on Canetti, one we veiy
much need, by the way, this should not be mistaken as Canettis sponsoiship
of insulai aestheticism. This book will, I hope, seive as a helpful coiiective to
those ievisionist scholais who, in my judgment, seek to iemake the authoi
into one of his quite questionable chaiacteis.
Autc-da-Fe is a dicult and complex book in pait because Canetti places
demands upon the ieadei commensuiate with those he laid upon himself.
My own book seeks to place the ieadei in a position to giasp the multi-
layeied paiody of this ambitious woik. Above all, this has meant explicat-
ing aspects of inteiwai Euiopean cultuie that may not be evident to con-
tempoiaiy ieadeis, and then inteipieting the novel against this backdiop. I
have selected six elds of inquiiy (each of which coiiesponds to a iespective
chaptei) as most benecial in this iegaid: (I) populai liteiatuie as an im-
plicit contiast to the novels own pioject, (:) misogyny and gendei concepts,
paiticulaily as they inteisect with the contempoiaiy ciisis of subjectivity,
(_) Weimai-eia philosophical schools and fads as dignied intellectual
iefuge fiom social conceins, () iacial anti-Semitism as the baiometei of
humanist cultuie, and (,) Fieud, as well as populaiized Fieudianism, as the
novels gieat negative inuence. The sixth and nal chaptei fullls two func-
tions: it places Canettis novel in the context of tiaditional liteiaiy modein-
I : i 1voi0c1i o
ism and peimits me the oppoitunity to iepiise the fundamental aiguments
of this study. As such, it seives in lieu of a moie foimal conclusion.
The title The End cf Mcdernism iisks conjuiing the peihaps vintage Ca-
nettian attitude of giandiosity. (As Susan Sontag iightly ieminds us, it was
Canettis unabashed aspiiation to know eveiything, and Crcwds and Pcwer
does indeed appeai to haiboi a summa anthiopologica kind of ambition.)
But this poition of the title will ceitainly mislead if taken to mean that Autc-
da-Fe somehowieceives and completes oi tiansmutes all the vaiious liteiaiy
tiibutaiies that lead into the muddy wateis of what would become known
as modeinism. Such would be an impossible claim in any event, since, as
I discuss below, the teim modeinism would iemain in consideiable ux
foi decades aftei the novels completion. The end to which I lay claim on
Canettis behalf is consideiably less compiehensive, but can only be stated
cleaily once we extiact ouiselves fiom the conceptual moiass that has de-
veloped aiound the teim modeinism. Autc-da-Fe is an end, but to what
piecisely:
Foitunately, the intellectual histoiian David Hollingei has inteivened to
iestoie some conceptual oidei, aiguing that alongside the peihaps bettei
known liteiaiy guie of the Aiticeihe takes Joyces Stephen Dedalus
as his piime examplewas always the moie analytically inclined guie of
the Knowei. Modeinismalways haiboied dual desiies, Hollingei explains,
both to cieate new meaning, in the smithy of ones soul, if need be, and to
know a moie oi less objective oideioi at least one that can be aimed
inteisubjectively. These two puisuits weie not, in the ist thiid of the twenti-
eth centuiy, incompatible, and peihaps only nowseemso, Hollingei shows,
in the wake of postmodeinist caiicatuie. Hollingeis dichotomy is illumi-
nating in geneial and piovides in paiticulai a iathei useful way of viewing
Canettis distinctive achievement. Moie than any of the othei gieat Geiman
piose modeinists, Canetti sought to inteiiogate the assumptions of the aiti-
cei fiomthe peispective of the knoweiwithout, let it be noted, collapsing
eithei position entiiely. While otheis may implicitly suggest the need foi the
knoweis peispectiveone thinks of Musil, Bioch, and Thomas Mann, all
of whomoei poweiful analyses of contempoianeous cultuienone stiuc-
tuies this into the veiy naiiative to the degiee of Autc-da-Fe. Canettis novel
distinctively ends the sole claimof the aiticeioi of those aiticei-smitten
ciiticsto iepiesent liteiaiy modeinism.
My focus on fiagmented subjectivity (as the taiget of Canettis ciitique)
i 1voi0c1i o : I,
and on the stiong epistemic naiiative stiuctuie (as the shibboleth of Ca-
nettis analytic piose) is meant theiefoie to highlight the ways in which
Autc-da-Fe occupies a unique boidei positionan endpoint, suiely, though
not to a meiely lineai piogiessionand thus a fiuitful peispective fiom
which to view laigei developments in liteiatuie and the aits. Though haidly
capiicious, my emphasis is necessaiily selective and thus cannot do justice
to all that modeinism has come to connote.
24
By situating Canetti within a
wide swath of Weimai-eia modeinist discouise (in the ist ve chapteis)
and into a discussion of ceitain salient aspects of postwai liteiaiy modein-
ism (in the nal chaptei), I have, I hope, laid the gioundwoik foi a cleaiei
giasp of the place of Autc-da-Fe in twentieth-centuiy Geiman letteis. But
this is by no means the nal woid. And, while attempting to claiify Canettis
distinctiveness, I do not wish in the piocess to have piopagated eiiois in
the opposite diiection. Though Bioch and Kafka (foi example) set them-
selves o fiom Canetti in ways I desciibe at some length below, we would be
foolish to oveilook theii enduiing similaiitiesthat which, aftei all, aigues
foi the compaiison in the ist place. Kafkas at chaiacteisdespite theii
cuiious utility in Adoinos conception of modeinismiemain in fact stiuc-
tuially similai to Canettis. And Biochs noted lament about paitial value
systemsthe ciitique of modeinity that suuses all thiee volumes of Die
Schlafwandler (The Sleepwalkeis, I,_o_:)ceitainly nds its counteipait
in Canettis aveision to the sometimes iiiitatingly unfoigettable piivate be-
lief woilds that chaiacteiize his novel. Puisuing these ielationships in the
piesent study, howevei, piesents a temptation I have had to iesist, the scope
of my pioject has peimitted only occasional asides and apeius on authois
to whom one could justiably dedicate whole chapteis. Alas, this is a task I
must leave to otheis, oi foi anothei day. I hope with this book to have pio-
vided an analysis iich enough to piovokeand peihaps even to position
such fuithei investigations.
I have diawn on Canettis autobiogiaphy extensively in the piepaiation of
this book, and thus it may be woith ieecting, at least biiey, on some
methodological consideiations. Theie is nothing of which Canetti scholai-
ship is in gieatei need than a tiuly ciitical biogiaphynot a meie iestate-
ment of the autobiogiaphy. When the estate papeis aie made accessible, pie-
sumably in :oo (accoiding to newspapei accounts as well as the Hansei
publishing house), suiely some of the widely accepted tiuisms about the
Io : i 1voi0c1i o
Canetti oeuvieincluding those that appeai inthe piesent studywill need
to be ievised. To some extent, this is simply inevitable. But even now, it is
cleai that a gieat deal of scholaishipand not only that which diaws di-
iectly on the autobiogiaphyconsists meiely in classifying Canettis ction
with Canettis own theoiies of language and society. While some of this is
manifestly eiioneous, as I aigue below, the gieatei dangei may be that it
is simply isolationist. Following the authois own least helpful example
Canetti famously fails to piopeily contextualize his social theoiy, oi even
fully acknowledge his intellectual piedecessoisthis kind of scholaiship
maintains a wall aiound the oeuvie. Iionically, this is a stiategy that is dia-
metiically opposed to Canettis moie laudable and often pathbieaking intei-
disciplinaiy inteiests.
I considei Canetti a piivileged and inheiently inteiesting, but not noi-
mative, inteipietei of his own woik, and wish theiefoie to take account of
his views whenevei this seems ielevant to my aigument. In no case, howevei,
have I based an aigument exclusively, oi even piimaiily, on such mateiial.
I also deem it necessaiy to acknowledge heie what most scholais know:
Canetti was veiy inteiested in shaping ciitical iesponses to his woik, though
peihaps no moie so than many othei authois. One should theiefoie take the
authois asseitions of inuence and the likepeihaps especially when they
t a ciitics aigument all too wellwith a giain oi two of salt.
My own inteipietative appioach deiives fuitheimoie fiom what I judge
to be the quality and puipose of the novels aiiay of inteitexts. In oidei
to sketch in essential aspects of inteiwai cultuie I have not ieinvented the
wheel, but diawn libeially on the intellectual histoiies of Judith Ryan and
Susan Maichand, the classic histoiy of philosophy by Fiedeiick Copleston,
as well as specialist studies by Petei Gay (on Fieud), and otheis too. I have
endeavoied, in othei woids, to biing the existing woik of numeious schol-
ais of vaiious elds into conveisation with the novel, and meet the ieadei at
the level most commensuiate with the intentions of Autc-da-Fe. What this
means, as I explain below in my discussion of philosophy, is that the novel
engages the educated ieadei and obseivei of widei cultuial tiends, but does
not seek to inteivene in scholaily philosophical debates pei se. Such an ap-
pioach is fiankly discouiaged by the mode of the allusion to inteiwai tiends
and guies: typically paiodistic, this iefeiential piactice is simply not ame-
nable to what one might considei an objective oi dispassionate scholaily
discussion. By diawing upon an aiiay of authoiities, I hope fuitheimoie to
i 1voi0c1i o : I,
evade the chaige of capiiciousness that has, not without ieason, been leveled
against cultuial studies.
25
While I am keenly inteiested to note how Autc-
da-Fe engages the widei cultuie, and seek to peimit the novel the fieedom
to diiect my attention, I tuin to those moie expeit than I in the aieas I have
identied above to demonstiate that the iespective phenomenon undei dis-
cussion is indeed a salient and signicant cultuial featuie of the inteiwai
peiiod independent of the novel.
Finally, a note of caution. Autc-da-Fe has been coiiectly chaiacteiized as
haiboiing a kind of ielentless analysis (bchrende Analyse).
26
In attempt-
ing to follow Canetti, I have piobably made myself guilty of the same ciime.
Again and again, the novel ietuins to its obsession with those question-
able, even ieactionaiy, cultuial piactices that contiibute to the dissolution
of the public spheie. Autc-da-Fe takes sometimes unexpected tuins, engages
in contioveisial and peihaps even objectionable aigument, but always ie-
tuins to this social agenda. I have undeitaken to document and analyze
each such tuin. While individual chapteis tieat ioughlydisciete topics, theie
is inevitably some oveilap. I have not, foi example, been able to tieat the
topic of misogyny without iaising issues that aie moie piopeily the piov-
ince of subsequent chapteis. Likewise, it has been necessaiy to tieat the anti-
Semitism of Willibald Alexiss text well befoie the majoi discussion of this
topic in chaptei . Neveitheless, the aigument is on the whole stiuctuied
so that ieadeis can come and go as they wish, each chaptei stands moie oi
less independently, with numeious signposts to othei chapteis, which can
be followed oi ignoied at the ieadeis leisuie.
I The Novel(s) in the Novel
Modeinism as Paiody of Populai Realism
A Dieient Kind of Novel
In I,_o an ambitious young authoi set out to wiite a dieient kind of
book: a novel that would stand out against the then iegnant Viennese lit-
eiatuie.
1
That twenty-ve-yeai-old iebiand had, as the seventy-yeai-old
Canetti iecounts it, high aspiiations, foi this was to be an austeie book,
meiciless, and, above all, a consideiable cut above eveiything that could
be iead as pleasant oi pleasing.
2
With a healthy sense indeed of his liteiaiy
impoitance, Canetti sought to distance his own woik fiom the populai c-
tion of the day: That which was accoided the highest piaise was of opeiatic
sentimentality, and among these weie the most pitiful jouinalists and dilet-
tantes. I cannot say that any one of these meant a thing to me, theii piose
lled me with disgust.
3
His iepulsion notwithstanding, Canetti seems to have been pieoccupied
with the populai iealist and neoiomantic liteiatuie of his day well befoie
I,,,, when he ist published the essay in which these iemaiks appeai. Foi he
cites and thematizes populai novels thioughout Autc-da-Fe, the novel that
was to iise fai above this humble faie. What is moieand innitely moie
complexhe constiucted his novel in a way that in some ways mimics the
veiy iealist naiiation he deploies. The point of these stiategies is to iepel
what Canetti felt was the tendency of ction to become an end in itself, and
thus an obstiuction to social awaieness. Fai fiom a cynical acquiescence in
the unieadability of the modein woild, Autc-da-Fe was to be a moie tiuth-
fuloi, at least, a less dishonestvehicle foi iepiesenting the menacing
complexity of modeinity.
When ciitics got aiound to analyzing the naiiative stiuctuie of his novel,
they discoveied what Canetti alieady knew, namely that as expeiimental as
Autc-da-Fe cleaily is, it simultaneously evinces a tiaditional foim. This led
Dietei Lieweischeidt to complain of AContiadiction in the Naiiative Con-
moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm : I,
ception of Elias Canettis Novel Autc-da-Fe.
4
Moie iecently, David Daiby
divines a iigidity of the naiiative stiuctuie luiking beneath the supeicial
chaos of the chaiacteis iival belief woilds, and while the novel may seem
innovative to untiained eyes, yet this exclusive iigidity suggests an essen-
tially tiaditional element in the naiiative conception of the naiiative stiuc-
tuie of Autc-da-Fe.
5
Both ciitics have coiiectly noted the novels aliation
with the tiaditional, oi what LennaidDavis in Resisting Ncvels calls the clas-
sic novel. What they miss, howevei, is the point that the ielationship of
Autc-da-Fe to populai iealism is not accidental oi insidiously atavistic, but
quite conscious and paiodistic.
Ceitainly none of this would have come as a suipiise to Canetti him-
self, who iepeatedly mentioned that his own novel was conceived as paiodic
imitation of Balzac: he did not plan simply to iewiite the Fiench masteis
human comedy, but to devise a mad new veisiona Comdie Hu-
maine an Iiien.
6
Indeed, in the same bieath that he makes his bold claim
foi bieaking new giound (One day the thought occuiied to me that the
woild could no longei be iepiesented as in eailiei novels), Canetti divulges
his piedilection foi imnaiiative stiuctuie, peihaps theieby delineating his
own woik fiom Rilkes Malte, oi, peihaps, fiom Doblins alieady successful
Berlin Alexanderplatz (I,:,), which had appeaied just as Canetti was making
notes foi his own novel: But that did not mean that one should cieate a
chaotic book, in which nothing was to be undeistood any longei, on the
contiaiy, one had to invent with the utmost discipline extieme individu-
als.
7
Piecisely because Canettis own austeie book imitates the veiy liteia-
tuie it paiodies, it will not suce to desciibe his novel as meiely lattei-day,
and peihaps even inadveitently, iealist. If Autc-da-Fe is somehow essen-
tially tiaditional, it is so only in the sense that paiody must, of necessity,
incoipoiate that which it exposes to ciitique.
Willibald Alexiss Die Hcsen des Herrn vcn Bredcw
The novel as liteiaiy genie ist becomes anissue inAutc-da-Fe whenKien
meets Theiese and decides she might just be educable: Was it too late, he
thought, howold can she be: It is nevei too late to leain. But she would have
to begin with simple novels.
8
He selects a giease-stained copy of Willibald
Alexiss Die Hcsen des Herrn vcn Bredcw(The Tiouseis of Mi. Biedow, I88),
:o : moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm
a dog-eaied volume that shows the weai and teai of having been passed
aiound by numeious boyhood fiiends. Abundle of contiadictions, Kien ab-
hois the selfsame book he has nevei been able to discaid. Though he ist
oeis Theiese the novel because he suspects that she longs foi cultuie,
9
he
loses no time in placing novels beyond the pale of tiue Geiman Geist:
A novel was the only thing woith consideiing foi hei. But no mind evei
giew fat on a diet of novels. The pleasuie which they occasionally oei is
fai too heavily paid foi: they undeimine the nest chaiacteis. They teach
us to think ouiselves into othei mens places. Thus we acquiie a taste foi
change. The peisonality becomes dissolved in pleasing gments of imagi-
nation. The ieadei leains to undeistand eveiy point of view. Willingly
he yields himself to the puisuit of othei peoples goals and loses sight of
his own. Novels aie so many wedges which the novelist, an actoi with his
pen, inseits into the closed peisonality of the ieadei. The bettei he calcu-
lates the size of the wedge and the stiength of the iesistance, so much the
moie completely does he ciack open the peisonality of his victim. Novels
should be piohibited by the State.
10
Kiens diatiibe calls to mind seiious questions about the status and value
of novels (echoing a contempoianeous debate on the cultuial iole of vei-
naculai national liteiatuies at univeisities),
11
but this humoiously paianoid
tiiadeespecially as it culminates in a Platonic demand foi state censoiship
of aitobviously cannot be taken as the novels nal woid on the issue. Yet
impiobable as it may seen, Kiens waiped feai of populai novels actually ex-
piesses the two points that will stiuctuie oui own discussion of Alexis. In
viewing novels as a kind of sexual seduction that leaves us dispeised and
spent, a notionwe will encountei againwithKiens biothei Geoig, the feaiful
piofessoi coiiectly aliates this kind of liteiatuie with escapism and pas-
sivity. Moie specically, Kiens feai of saciicing his own agency, even disin-
tegiating his veiy self, by immeising himself in multiple pleasuiable acts of
ieadeily identication piovides an impoitant point of contiast, albeit comi-
cally exaggeiated, against which Autc-da-Fe denes itself. Yet at this point,
we must still gieet these themesKiens feai of being bodily penetiated by
novels, his hoiioi at peimitting the disintegiation of his caiefully cultivated
Charakter by means of sympathetic oveiidentication with ctional chaiac-
teis, and his concomitant assumption that novels aie just the iight faie foi
womenwith the deep suspicion they so iichly deseive.
moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm : :I
We encountei this same sexual oiientation towaid novels once again
in Theieses ieaction to Kiens gift. Misled by what she takes to be a sug-
gestive title, The Tiouseis of Mi. Biedow, she takes the book foi a poino-
giaphic potboilei: She opened the book and iead aloud, The Trcusers
she inteiiupted heiself but did not blush. Hei face bedewed with a light
sweat.
12
Heie Canetti slyly alludes to a veiy similai ieception of this same
novel in what is peihaps the most beloved instance of Geiman iealism,
Theodoi Fontanes E Briest (I8,,). Fontanes Roswitha, a simple domes-
tic not unlike Theiese, has been asked to boiiow a whole list of books fiom
the local libiaiy in oidei to caiiy E thiough hei feigned illness designed
to lengthen hei stay in Beilin. But Roswitha balks at the last item on the
list, which is of couise Alexiss Die Hcsen des Herrn vcn Bredcw. Roswitha
iead to the bottom of the list, the naiiatoi infoims us, and in the next
ioom cut o the last line, she was ashamedboth foi heiself and foi hei
mistiessto hand ovei the list in its oiiginal foim.
13
Like Theiese, the semi-
liteiate seivant Roswitha assumes the novel is lascivious in natuie and theie-
foie disieputable. But unlike Roswitha, Theiese eageily lunges foi the book,
she does nct blush, Canettis naiiatoi pointedly says, but only woiks up a
little anticipatoiy sweat. With this one allusion, Canetti pithily indicates the
pioblematic appeal of Alexis and his ilk. As Es iequest to Roswitha indi-
cates, Alexis is sought out as a means to kill time, as a pleasant distiaction
fiom cuiient pioblems, indeed E imploies Roswitha to select ieally old
books, confusing peihaps the sixteenth-centuiy setting of Hcsen with its
mid-nineteenth-centuiy date of conception and publication.
14
And, as we
have seen in both Roswitha and Theiese, Alexis aiouses a kind of misplaced
sexual appeal, which we will exploie fuithei below.
While it is tiue that the coie of Canettis Alexis ieception is alieady ad-
umbiated in these ist, biief ieactions of Kien and Theiese, these passages
seive only to foieshadow an inteitextual iefeience of tiemendous signi-
cance thioughout the novel. The Alexis inteitextwhich is cited no less
than eight times
15
cleaily piesents an illustiation of the kind of novel Autc-
da-Fe was meant to oveicome: an example of cultuially aimative histoiical
iealism that oeis solace to ieadeis iathei than a challenge to engage with
contempoiaiycultuial debates. The secondandielatedpoint of contiast
will be the naiiative supeiciliousness of Die Hcsen, a conceit that conceals,
iathei than pioblematizes, the use of invidious steieotypes. This authoii-
tative endoisement of Geimanic cultuial unity pioved highly seductive,
:: : moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm
Canetti suggests, to an identity-depiived Weimai ieadeiship.
16
But we aie
fai ahead of oui stoiy.
It may well be that foi the postWoild Wai II geneiation of ieadeis
neithei the name WilhelmHaiing (I,,8I8,I) noi his bettei known pseudo-
nymWillibald Alexis iings a bell. Indeed by I,,o the Alexis scholai L. H. C.
Thomas pioclaimed that the bulk of the authois woik, including his most
populai novel Die Hcsen des Herrn vcn Bredcw, had passed into oblivion.
17
Alexis, who began his liteiaiy caieei in I8:: with a tianslation of Sii Waltei
Scott and latei wiote a seiies of eight histoiical patiiotic novels (vaterlan-
dische Rcmane), nevei escaped the latteis shadow, indeed he had become
widely celebiated as the Geiman Waltei Scott.
18
Aftei Fontane and Fiey-
tag, whose envy of Alexiss continuing populaiity may have had something
to do with the latteis eclipse, Alexis was the most populai iealist authoi of
the nineteenth centuiy. Although his woik was not always enthusiastically
ieceived by nineteenth-centuiy ciitics, his masteipiece novel (Thomas)
achieved instant and sustained success: Accoiding to book lists, no fewei
than sixty editions and iepiints of Die Hcsen des Herrn vcn Bredcw have
appeaied since the date of ist publication.
19
When Canetti sat down to wiite Autc-da-Fe he could count on the fact
that Die Hcsen was still widely known.
20
The novel was published and ie-
piinted thioughout the twenties, ieaching a high point in I,: and I,:,
with ve sepaiate editions appeaiing each yeai.
21
These editions seem to
have taigeted youthful and patiiotic ieadeis, foi theii publisheis boie names
such as the Deutsche }ugendklub-Bucherei (Geiman Youth Club Libiaiy) and
the Deutsche Dichter-Gedachtnis-Stiftung (Geiman Poets Memoiial Foun-
dation, Diesden, I,:,) and they weie included in seiies such as Lebens-
bucher der }ugend (Lifebooks of the Young, Westeimann, I,:_:,), Bucher
der Deutschen (Books of the Geimans, Stiepel, I,::) and Die bunten Rcmane
der Veltliteratur (Coloiful Novels of Woild Liteiatuie, Veilag dei Schillei-
buchhandlung, I,:,). In the pievious decade the novel had been annotated
foi use in histoiy couises and was joined in I,:I by anothei school edi-
tion fiom the piesses of Velhagen and Klasing. In I,:8 Die Hcsen joined the
ianks of Reclams Universal-Biblicthek, a well-known and iespected seiies of
inexpensive papeibacks designed to biing cultuie to the masses.
22
Though
Fontane may ultimately have been coiiect when he piophesied in I8,_ that
Alexis would only be iemembeied by local fan clubs (die kleinenW. Alexis-
gemeinden), he completely missed the maik when it came to the enoimous
Figure :. Title page frcm a turn-cf-the-century editicn cf Villibald Alexiss
Die Hosen des Heiin von Biedow. Harvard University Libraries.
: : moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm
populaiity of Die Hcsen in the ist half of this centuiy.
23
What did those
contempoiaiies of the twenty-ve-yeai-oldCanetti know, that we, inall like-
lihood, no longei do:
The stoiy, which was once as familiai to Geimans as Maik Twains Tcm
Sawyer still is to Ameiicans, is quickly told. While Gotz von Biedow, a
fiontiei nobleman of the eaily sixteenth centuiy, is sleeping o a diinking
bout held in celebiation of the conclusion of a piovincial diet (Landtag),
his wife Biigitte sneaks o his famous tiouseis to give them a long ovei-
due washing. Hei moial dilemma, which she eainestly discusses with the
Dechant (a cleigyman), aiises fiom the conict between hei duty as Haus-
frau to uphold an exemplaiy standaid of cleanliness and hei obligation as
Frau not to deceive hei husband, who could nevei beai to be paited fiom
his lucky tiouseis. Thus, contiaiy to the piuiient expectations aioused in
bothRoswitha andTheiese, this womans inteiest iniemoving hei husbands
pants is totally lacking in eiotic motivation, it is, iathei, puiely a Geiman
dilemma between two kinds of duty. Biigitte eiis on the side of cleanliness
and submits hei husbands legendaiy elk skin pants (Elenshcsen) to the an-
nual outdooi fall laundiy. A wandeiing peddlei, oi Kramer, aiiives on the
scene and aiouses the attention of the laundiy detail, which is staived foi
news and held in awe by his magnicent waies.
Some of the Kramers goods tuin out to be fiaudulent, a plot segment
that exhibits a longstanding anti-Semitic tiope about the deceitful Jew, as we
will have fuithei occasion to notice below. The ensuing displeasuie sets the
plot, at long last, in motion. Late that night in the Biedowcastle Hchenzia
an unexpected guest aiiives: it is Lindenbeig, tiusted advisoi to the Electoi
Joachim I in Beilin, and a distant ielation of the Biedows. Having lost in a
ciap game all the money entiusted to him by the piince foi distiibution to
the pooi, Lindenbeig begins to cast about foi ways to ieplenish his puise
and avoid humiliation at couit.
He mounts a diatiibebeginning with the young Electoi and culmi-
nating with that upstait bouigeois iabble (Burgerpack)against all the
social and political foices that thieaten the tiaditional piivileges of the
landed aiistociacy. This diunken haiangue is cleaily piompted by Linden-
beigs gambling losses and is suspiciously fiamed by mention of the iich
peddlei Klaus Heddeiich, who, it is said, could well aoid to ielieve the
nobleman of his nancial embaiiassment. Lindenbeig hatches a plan to ini-
tiate the adopted noble sons Hans-Jochem and Hans-Juigen into the an-
moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm : :,
cientand now foibiddenFaustrecht of the aiistociacy. Though Linden-
beig claims that the ieasseition of this now obsolete aiistociatic piactice of
appiopiiating piopeity at will is meant to iediess the contempoiaiy boui-
geois aiont to the }unker nobility, he will conveniently line his own pockets
while taking this piincipled stand. That night they set out to ambush the
peddlei Heddeiich, ostensibly to teach him a lesson foi selling false waies,
but actually to ielieve him of his consideiable wealth.
The biotheis Hans (Hans-JochemandHans-Juigen) aie guies boiiowed
fiom the folk tale. All too piedictably, one is good looking, well liked, and
destined foi knighthood and the woild, wheieas the othei is distinctly plain,
painfully shy, and maiked foi the monasteiy. Equally foieseeable is the
eventual ieveisal: the handsome Hans-Jochem is ciippled in the iaid on
Heddeiich and is caited o to the cloistei. Hans-Juigen iises to the occasion,
iecoveis von Biedows pants (which the peddlei had stolen), and becomes,
by viitue of his uninching honesty, the tiustwoithy advisoi to the Electoi,
ieplacing the tieacheious Lindenbeig. Eva, once the object of Hans-Jochems
vain desiie, becomes his biotheis biide. With this maiiiage, Hans-Juigens
ascent fiomneglected, oiphaned son to piivileged ioyal advisoi is complete.
It is a typical iags-to-iiches faiiy tale.
The stoiy moves within caiefully plotted moial cooidinates: Hans-
Jochem, the naiiatoi instiucts us, was given to vanity and piide,
24
and the
favoied tieatment he ieceived fiom his adoptive family had suspiciously to
do with a ceitain substantial inheiitance,
25
which his biothei lacked. His
maiming injuiy was, theiefoie, foieoidained by a naiiative logic that pun-
ishes evil and iewaids good. The tieasonous Lindenbeig pays foi his dis-
loyalty with his life, and even the ultimately good Electoi-piince must pay
foi his youthful naivet and gullibility. Though eveiy guie must at some
point withstand the sciutiny of the moializing naiiatoi, none acquits heiself
quite so well as the good wife Biigitte. Aftei the know-it-all naiiatoi, she is
the moial standaid beaiei of the novel: A woman who knows hei place, she
can switch eoitlessly fiom the iole of absolute iulei (unumschiankte
Heiiin) in household matteis to the most subseivient of women vis--vis
men.
26
Indicating theii essential consonance, the naiiatoi says of Biigitte:
The housewife consideied all mannei of haid woik a celebiation, and we
think so too.
27
It comes as no suipiise, then, that Biigitte is the ieal heio
of the novel: due to hei ingenuity (and the piactice she gained duiing the
iecent autumnal outdooi laundiy), she is again able to depiive hei husband
:o : moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm
of his heiiloom pants, and theieby ensuie his failuie to take pait in the ie-
bellion against the Electoi. Hans-Juigen can decisively piove von Biedows
innocence because, thanks toBiigitte, he is able showthat thioughout the in-
suiiection he had been in possession of Die Hosen des Heiin von Biedow.
Those eaily ieadeis of Autc-da-Fe who weie still familiai with Alexiss
novel, peihaps fiomtheii childhoodieading, peihaps evenfiomtheii school
cuiiiculum, would piobably ist have been stiuck by the humoious incon-
giuity. Beyond the fact that Theiese is viitually illiteiate, it is cleai that Kien,
who iead and ieiead Die Hcsen as a child, mistakenly thinks of Theiese
as a haimless Biigitte guie. Like his cultuial cousin Piofessoi Rath (oi, as
his unappieciative students called him, Piofessoi Uniath), Kien conceives
of women in a painfully nave mannei that is thoioughly infoimed by the
idealizing liteiatuie of a bygone eia.
28
This comes as no suipiise, foi, as
we shall see, Kiens conceptions of the mateiial, sensual woildof which
women aie simply the chief exponentsaie piedeteimined by the highei
tiuths of books. Kien no moie compiehends Theiese as an eiotic paitnei
than Emanuel Rath does Lola-Lolas manifest sexuality (sleeping with Lola-
Lola meant just that: sleeping). On the contiaiy, Kien anticipates in the ist
instance a model housekeepei, oi Virtschafterin (an expectation Theiese
initially fullls in hei solicitous tieatment of Die Hcsen), and a Biigitte-
like woman, who knows hei place. As we shall see in the following chaptei,
Theiese giotesquely clashes with the gendei expectations of both Kien and
contempoianeous cultuie.
29
The key aspect of Die Hcsen, howevei, and one that would have been
iemembeied long aftei plot twists and tuins weie foigotten, is that it is a
histoiical novel at a double iemove fiom the postWoild Wai I peiiod in
which Canetti paiodically cites it. Though it may seemhaid to believe in the
wake of the debate on histoiy and ction initiated by HaydenWhite, histoii-
cal ction was (and peihaps still is in some quaiteis) taken veiy seiiously
as histcry.
30
Foi Adolf von Giolmann, foi example, Alexiss histoiical ction
iepiesents an inteinal contiadiction that neveitheless demands adulation
when it is caiiied o well.
31
Despite the inevitable pitfalls endemic to the
mix of histoiy and ction, Die Hcsen, of all Alexiss vaterlandische Rcmane
(the subtitle of a whole seiies of his books) ieceives the highest maiks foi
its faithfulness to histoiy. Thomas even goes so fai as to ciedit Alexis as a
foieiunnei of the eminent positivist histoiian Leopold von Ranke.
32
What-
evei we might today make of this novels ielationship to the eaily sixteenth
moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm : :,
centuiy, the fact iemains that Geiman pedagogues and publisheis of the
Weimai peiiod deemed it appiopiiate foi the classioom.
This association of Alexis with the giand tiadition of Rankian positiv-
ism may, howevei, distiact fiom the moie questionable ends to which such
liteiatuie was ioutinely put, namely, as cultuially aimative puiveyoi of
national(ist) tiadition. Lynne Tatlock suggests that Alexiss histoiical novels
weie always simultaneously a means of coping with contempoianeous ieal-
ity: it is a mistake, she says, to see the histoiical novel and the novel of con-
tempoiaiy life as two distinct genies.
33
At the tuin of the centuiy, Thomas
suggests, Alexiss woiks may have been ocially encouiaged foi political
ieasons. Intheyeais following the unicationof Geimanyaneoit was made
to build up a Geiman tiadition, something which oldei nations had cieated
foi themselves thiough the centuiies. The impoitance of Piussia, now the
centei of the newstate, iequiied emphasis, and Alexiss novels weie based on
what little histoiical tiadition Piussia had to oei.
34
The ideological value
of the vaterlandische Rcmane in shoiing up the Piussian state seems cleai
enough, patiiotism was at any iate the Alexian attiibute emphasized both
by Fieytag and Fontane. The appeal of Die Hcsen and similai histoiical c-
tion duiing the Weimai peiiod cannot have been veiy dieient. At a time
when national identity and political tiaditions weie eithei lacking oi hotly
contested, novels in the mode of Alexis, which celebiate Geiman histoii-
cal tiaditions that peihaps nevei weie, must have piovided an anchoi in an
ideological maelstiom. In this iegaid, we would do well to iecall that the
modeinist and new objectivist aesthetics that emeiged in Geimany in the
I,:os weie by no means typical of the time. In fact, as Wolfgang Nattei
points out in his study Literature at Var, :;::;o, tiaditionalist, patiiotic,
and nationalist liteiatuie was deeply entienched and, indeed, piomoted by
viitually all the Geiman cultuial institutions in any way connected with lit-
eiatuie.
35
Foi Canetti, at any iate, the iecouise to histoiical ction as an
amelioiative foi the identity ciises of the inteiwai peiiod iepiesented one of
those ieactionaiy iesponses to modeinity the gieatei novel paiodies.
Canetti captuies this ight into histoiy above all by means of his piotago-
nist, whose own piactice of ieading the woild ieplicates that of the classic
Alexian histoiical novel. Befoie Theiese becomes his chief nemesis, Kiens
confiontation with biutal ieality takes the foim of his ielationship to Bene-
dikt Pfa, the ietiied police ocei tuined dooiman. Though Kien would
like to think of the monthly payments to this ogie as a geneious giatuity,
:8 : moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm
they amount in fact to the kind of biibe maa toughs extoit in ietuin foi
piotection. Kiens method of coping with this menacing biute is to his-
toiicize him in a mannei that both alludes to and ieiteiates the histoiical
appeal of Alexiss novel. The peiiod to which Kien assigns Pfa, the eaily
sixteenth centuiy, undeiscoies the connection to Die Hcsen des Herrn vcn
Bredcw. Rumaging thiough a pile of books, Kien alights upon an academic
stiategy that will disaim this menacing beast:
In the catalogue of the fallen books, theie guied as No. _, a stout antique
volume on Arms and Tactics cf the Landsknechts. Scaicely had it cuivetted
o the laddei, with feaiful ciash, than the tiumpeting caietakeis weie
tiansfoimed into landsknechts. Avast inspiiation suiged up in Kien. The
caietakei was a landsknecht, what else: The st had no moie teiiois foi
him. Befoie himsat a familiai histoiical guie. He knewwhat it would do
and what it would not do . . . Unhappy, late-boin cieatuie, who had come
into the woild a landsknecht in the twentieth centuiy . . . shut out fiom
the epoch foi which it had been cieated, stianded in anothei to which it
would always iemain a stiangei! In the innccucus remcteness cf the six-
teenth century the caretaker dwindled tc ncthing, let him brag as he wculd!
Tc master a fellcw-creature, it suces tc nd his place in histcry.
36
It is of couise not the sixteenth centuiy pei se that elicits such a sense of
calm in the piofessoi, but its safe iemove fiom the iough and tumble of the
inteiwai piesent. Recall that this was a time, as Thomas Mann iecoids in
his diaiies, when militaiy issue machine guns fiom the Fiist Woild Wai fell
into the hands of iival cliques, cieating havoc in the once seiene stieets of
Munich. Kien maintains this histoiicizing illusion about Pfa thioughout
the bulk of the novel until his tiue biutality is no longei avoidable. When
the biutish Hausbescrger appiehends Kien at the Theiesianum (the state-
iun auction house cum pawn shop), Kien begiudgingly admits, in a pun
that is chaiacteiistic of the novels wit, Die Vergangenheit ist vcrbei
37
(The
past is ovei)meaning that the iuse of employing histoiy as piophylactic
against a disconceiting piesent had now decisively failed. With Kiens en-
thusiasmfoi the haimless distance of the past, Canetti puts his ngei both
on a contempoiaiy tiend of the inteiwai peiiod and on a bankiupt stiategy
of histoiical iealism that is best summed up as escapism.
38
Kien develops
this talent into a viitual cult of the pastat the expense, of couise, of any
moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm : :,
engagement with his own contempoiaiy polity.
39
Iionically, Kien, who set
himself so fai above Alexiss histoiical ction, lives by the veiy same escapist
piinciples.
Kiens biothei Geoig piesents a stiikingly similai view of belletiistic
novels: foi him they iepiesent an insulai phase to be oveicome, something
he believes he has left behind in oidei to tuin to the woild of the mentally ill.
Geoig, too, associates novels with sex and women. But wheieas Petei dieads
novels as wedges (Keile) that would penetiate and dissolve the aimoi of
his panzeilike Charakter, leaving him spent and distiacted, Geoig fondly
iemembeis them as pleasuiable occasions of sexuality: Reading was fon-
dling, was anothei foim of love, was foi ladies and ladies doctois, to whose
piofession a delicate undeistanding of lecture intime piopeily belonged.
40
Such pleasuies aie, of couise, piivate, in fact, Geoig ielates the joys of
schcngeistige Lekture (polite, usually belletiistic liteiatuie) diiectly to its
ability to smooth ovei the social divisions of the ieal woild by ieiteiating
empty but elegantly foimulated sentences about intimacy.
41
In the follow-
ing passage, we obseive how Geoig explicitly links novelistic escapism to
mindless sex. Moieovei, it appeais that Fiench novels seived foi him as a
kind of instiuctional manual foi seducing the clients of his gynecological
piactice, while pioviding the simultaneous pleasuie of distiacting him fiom
the tiagic and disiuptive events of his own society:
The best novels weie those in which the people spoke in the most cul-
tuied way . . . The task of such a wiitei was to ieduce the angulai, pain-
ful, biting multifaiiousness of life as it was all aiound one, to the smooth
suiface of a sheet of papei, on which it could pleasantly and swiftly be
iead o . . . The moie often was the same tiack tiaveised, the subtlei was
the pleasuie deiived fiom the jouiney . . . Geoiges Kien had staited as a
gynaecologist. His youth and good looks biought patients in ciowds. At
that peiiod, which did not last long, he gave himself up to Fiench novels,
they played a consideiable pait in assuiing his success . . . Suiiounded
and spoilt by innumeiable women, all ieady to seive him, he lived like
Piince Gautama befoie he became Buddha. No anxious fathei and piince
had cut him o fiom the miseiies of the woild, but he sawold age, death
and beggais in such an abundance that he no longei noticed them. Yet
he was indeed cut o, by the books he iead, the sentences he spoke, the
women who weie ianged iound him in a gieedy close-built wall.
42
_o : moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm
Sealed o (abgeschlcssen), piotected by an unbioken wall (geschlcssene
Mauer): Theie is piobably no cleaiei expiession of liteiatuies pioblematic
potentialheie linked explicitly to male heteiosexual giaticationto be-
come an insulai foim of escapism. Geoigs conception of novel ieading as
a soit of eioticized anaesthesia ceitainly takes the ciitique of Alexiss com-
foiting histoiicisma step fuithei. Yet, given the fact that Geoig himself tuins
out to be a thoioughly questionable chaiactei, can we condently say that
this is the oveiall position of Autc-da-Fe?
Given the demonstiable social conceins of Canettis novel, which aie de-
tailed fuithei in subsequent chapteis of this study, as well as the consistently
skeptical attitude towaid insulai behavioi we encountei in the novel, we can
assume that Geoigs iejection of belletiistic novels as pleasuiable diveisions
falls in linethough peihaps not quite in the way he intendedwith the
novels laigei position. But the question about Geoigs ieliability is nevei-
theless well placed, because it will lead us to a moie piecise distinction. The
simple pleasure deiived fiom identifying with a beautiful and tiustwoithy
chaiactei, which is a standaid featuie of populai piose, becomes moie com-
plicated in Autc-da-Fe. It is not that Canetti sets out to depiive us of these
giatications utteily, iathei he shows, above all in Geoig, that identication
is both a necessaiy and highly pioblematic piocess. The question of Geoigs
ciedibility iegaiding his views on novels, then, is itself pait of a laigei nai-
iative stiategy that is designed to entice the ieadei to identify with him. We
aie intended, in othei woids, to appiove of Geoig, at least piovisionally,
and thus it comes as little suipiise that he heie seems so iight about novels.
Ultimately, the point is neithei to establish the biotheis Kien as tiustwoithy
noi as ieliably and consistently untiustwoithy, like all modeinists, Canetti
foiegiounds the ieadeis iole in making and ievising such judgments. But
he does so in ways that have not yet been fully appieciated. To elucidate this
point will iequiie us, tempoiaiily at least, to leave oui Trcusers behindbut
not without a piomise to ietuin.
Asciiptive Naiiation
Geoigs musings on novel ieading as an essentially antisocial mode of
autoeiotic giatication comes veiy close to the view pioeied by the ciitic
Lennaid J. Davis, who, in Resisting Ncvels wains against novelistic seduc-
moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm : _I
tions. He ieminds us that novels aie not life . . . and that] theii function
is to help humans adapt to the fiagmentation and isolation of the modein
woild.
43
Foi Davis, as foi Canetti, this function is highly suspect, because
social fiagmentation is typically oveicome in novel ieading not thiough en-
gagement, but by means of puie avoidance. Thus the classic novelthe ieal-
ist novel of the nineteenth centuiy, which is the focus of Daviss study
oeis a numbei of dubious defenses against modeinity which, in tuin, meiit
oui vigilant supeivision.
Cential among these defenses is the piocess of identication.
44
Daviss ie-
maiks on this mechanismwill help us undeistand what Canetti is up to with
the asymmetiical guie of Geoig:
Now the issue of physical beauty becomes moie undeistandable. Since
the physical beauty of most piotagonists is not accidental but taken as a
functioning iequiiement of the classic novel, I would suggest its function
is that it encouiages the element of desiie to entei the ieading piocess.
In making a chaiactei attiactive, the authoi can diaw the ieadei towaids
that set of signs much as adveitiseis can diawconsumeis towaid a piod-
uct by associating it with a physically attiactive model. In eect, it is not
so much that we identify with a chaiactei, but that we desiie that chaiac-
tei in some nonspecic but eiotic way. In this sense, pait of novel ieading
is the piocess of falling in love with chaiacteis oi making fiiends with
signs.
45
With this in mind, the stiuctuial spoof on iealist identication that at-
tends the intioduction of Geoig Kien comes moie cleaily into view. Geoig is
not only the most likable chaiactei in a novel peopled with despicable and
disgusting louts, he is also the most dieientiated of the otheiwise at chai-
acteis. Dagmai Bainouwobseives coiiectly that he is the most ambivalent,
the most psychologically iealistic guie of the novel.
46
Yet, above all, he
isoi appeais at ist blushbeautiful and kind.
47
He was tall, stiong,
eiy and suie of himself, in his featuies theie was something of that gentle-
ness which women need befoie they can feel at home with a man. Those who
saw him compaied him to Michelangelos Adam.
48
Only latei will it occui
to the ieadei that this glowing desciiption, not unlike those laudatoiy pio-
giam notes about actois and singeis, has been authoied by none othei than
the honoiee himself.
Canettis point in intioducing the good, and good-looking, doctoi foui-
_: : moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm
fths thiough Autc-da-Fe, is cential to the novels pioject of ieecting on
and distancing itself fiompopulai contempoiaiy iealism. Up until this
point in the novel, Canetti has depiived us of any identication possibilities
by seiving up miseis, cheats, and self-deluded megalomaniacs. With Geoig
we get foi the ist time someone like us, which is to say someone like oui
idealized selves, a peison we can tiust. Moie than that, as Davis would ie-
mind us, we ieceive with Geoig the ideological comfoit that comes fiom
the belief in unitaiy chaiacteis, and fiom the conviction that individuals
caneect social changeiecall that Geoig is a woild-ienowned psychiatiist,
whose ievolutionaiy methods of tieatment aie the envy of the piofession
and the piomise of the futuie.
49
Eaily ciitics of the novel took the bait, as I believe ist time ieadeis still
do: Einst Waldingeis ieview of I,_o asseits, foi example, that Geoig sym-
bolically iepiesentsas we can easily guessthe wiitei himself with his in-
teipietations and solutions.
50
Similaily, Waltei Allen, in a ieview of I,,,
wiites of Geoig as the one sane chaiactei in the book . . . an eminent psy-
chiatiist . . . who alone is awaie of objective ieality.
51
The novel does not
ultimately suppoit such an identication, as Bainouwhas quite peisuasively
shown, but it does tease us. Aftei all, as we shall see in the following chaptei,
Geoig, who consideis himself such a distinguished connoisseui of men
(Menschenkenner), completely bungles his biotheis cuie.
52
Why the tease: What Canetti has enacted at the stiuctuial level by having
us lunge towaid Geoig to satisfy oui ciaving foi identication is a ieplay of
an epistemological object lessonthis time between ieadei and textthat
has alieady been played out a numbei of times at the level of stoiy and that
is pait and paicel of iealist ction like Die Hcsen. The pitfall, as we see again
and again, is that identication, as a piocess foi deteimining what is tiue,
ieal, and valuable is an extiemely pioblematic piocess. Wheieas Alexisas
we shall soon seepioeis identication in a naive and unieective man-
nei, Canetti makes it the object of meiciless paiody.
In the following scene, Fischeile, the hunchback dwaif Kien meets when
he is evicted fiom his libiaiy-apaitment, attempts to ingiatiate himself
by showing exaggeiated concein foi the piofessois unwieldy mental li-
biaiy (Kcpfbiblicthek). Befoie peimitting this little man (Mannchen) to
take on this awesome iesponsibility, Kien inquiies, as a standaid piecaution,
whethei this incoiiigible thief has evei stolen. Kien ieceives the assuiance
he needs when he discoveis that he and Fischeile shaie a lack of athletic
moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm : __
piowessthat is, just at that moment when he establishes an identicatoiy
bond:
You aie no doubt a fast iunnei: Fischeile saw thiough the tiap and an-
sweied: What would be the point of lying: When you take a step, I take
half a one. At school I was always the woist iunnei. He thought up the
name of a school lest Kien should ask him: in fact he had nevei been to
one. But Kien was wiestling with weightiei pioblems namely the mem-
oiy of his own physical shoitcomings]. He was about to make the gieatest
gestuie of tiust of his entiie life. I believe you! he said simply. Fischeile
was jubilant.
53
Latei, in the couise of Fischeiles scheme devised to eece him, Kien
chooses to believe a fai-fetched tale concocted by the Fischerin (Fischeiles
would-be lovei) simply because hei indignation pleased him.
54
The novel
is full of such scenes in which a misplaced identication of one guie with
anothei iesults in hilaiious misconstiuctions. Ciitics miss the point, theie-
foie, when they stiess exclusively the ieadeis epistemological supeiioiity
ovei the ctional woild of Autc-da-Fe, foigetting that we, too, fall foi Geoig
in a mannei that has been ieheaised at the guial level thioughout the novel.
Moieovei, theie is a ceitain waimth to this inclusive gestuie that ciitics
often oveilook. While I stiess the fact that Canetti subjects his ieadeis to
the veiy identication tiap in which he enmeshes his iepellent guies, theie
is peihaps a positive side to this technique: oui condescension towaid the
novels guies is pieiced by the iealization that we, too, aie implicated in
the veiy same heimeneutic piocess. As if to make the point that we aie all
subject to the Janus-faced potential endemic to identication, which holds
out both the piospect of insight as well as the dangei of vain distoition,
Canetti comments in his autobiogiaphy on a iumoi, passed along by an
otheiwise thoioughly untiustwoithy gossip (Schwatzer), about his deai
fiiend Di. Sonne. I accepted the heaisay] without fuithei investigation,
he condes, it simply pleased me so much, that I gianted it ciedulity.
55
Of
couise, this iumoi (which, incidentally, claimed that Sonne was a gieat phi-
lanthiopist who attempted to keep his geneiosity anonymous) could piove
false, Canetti is obviously no less vulneiable to eiioi than anyone else. Con-
sideiing the issue of identication fiom this ietiospective view, the novels
position comes moie cleaily into view. The peiceptual eiioi Canetti seems
so conceined with in the novel is peihaps not the essential epistemologi-
_ : moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm
cal dilemma, the erkenntnisthecretische pioblemattending any such act of
judgment, but the fact that the typical case of guial identication implies a
willful ieduction of the othei to the veiy limited paiameteis of the piojecting
self. Canettis own identication with Sonne fails to aiouse oui condemna-
tion not because it is any less fiaught with possible eiioi, but because this
piocess diiects Canetti outwaid and positively, fai beyond his own abilities
and inteiests. It is fiankly tiue that the mattei of identication is tieated in
Autc-da-Fe in piimaiily negative teims: heie it is piincipally a dangei that
the novel will not let us foiget. But this pioves to be a cential concept in
Canettis thinking that evolved signicantly thioughout this life. Autc-da-
Fe fiames the question, but it is not the last woid on the heimeneutics of
identication. Heie as elsewheie, we aie undoubtedly iichei foi consideiing
the full scope of Canettis thought, but it would be mistaken to asseit ciass
equations. In opposition to Fieud, as I endeavoi to show in the penultimate
chaptei of this study, Canetti latei developed a positive concept of tians-
foimative identication that he would famously dub Verwandlunglitei-
ally, metamoiphosis. As in othei key aieas, the novels insistent negations
would lead ultimately to moie positive, though still cautious, aimations.
But once again, we aie fai ahead of oui stoiy.
When Davis wiites of novelistic identication, he is explicitly expand-
ing the teim to include both chaiactei and naiiatoi, foi the lattei is also
a souice of seduction as well as an object of identication.
56
Indeed, Davis
goes so fai as to collapse the two when, foi example, he maintains that the
chaiactei with whom ieadeis most seek to connect is the naiiatoi.
57
If we
tuin oui attention now to that poition of Die Hcsen which, we aie told,
Theiese so meticulously ieads and ieieads, we aie immediately confionted
with an instiuctive contiast. Daviss obseivations on classic naiiation pie-
paie us peifectly foi the Alexian naiiatoi: The piesence of the naiiatoi is
comfoiting and matuie, and authoiizes the iestoiation of oidei, commu-
nity and communication by his oi hei veiy piesence. This authoiity is made
even moie diamatic in the nineteenth centuiy by the ction that almost all
naiiatois aie male.
58
Tiue to foim, Alexiss patiiaichal naiiatoi opens with
an expansive aeiial shot of Biigittes Herbstwasche (autumn laundiy), asks
himself ihetoiically what those specks of white could be, suggests a whole
seiies of incoiiect answeis as he slowly moves us closei to the scene, and
nally biings the gieat laundiy enteipiise into shaip focus. The naiiatois
masteiy of space iepeats itself when he momentaiily occupies the peispec-
moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm : _,
tive of the man in the moon.
59
When Biigitte latei ventuies out onto the ioof,
but is too pieoccupied with hei husbands pants to take in the bieathtaking
sceneiy, the naiiatoi steps in to tell us what she dcesnt see.
60
His magisteiial spatial puiview is matched by his tempoial peispective:
conscious of the inteivening centuiies, and constantly mediating between
the past and the piesent, the naiiatoi intioduces a long desciiptive passage
with these woids: At that time the iegion was completely dieient than it is
today.
61
Most impoitantly, the naiiatoi piovides the moial fulcium, step-
ping back occasionally even fiom his beloved Biigitte to iemind us: But
the best woman iemains a woman,
62
suggesting that even someone as sen-
sible and piactical as Biigitte cannot be assumed to tianscend the inheient
weaknesses of hei gendei.
Alexiss naiiatoi, in othei woids, peifectly demonstiates Daviss soothing
male authoiity guie, who piovides seemingly ieliable ethical and episte-
mological oiientation to the ieadei. Foi Davis, this aspect of epistemological
authoiity is the sine qua non of the classic naiiatoi and explains oui most
fundamental attiaction to this voice in the text: As chaiacteis, then, naiia-
tois may not have physical beauty, but they aie iequiied to knowthe woild.
The cential myth heie, as with the myth of beauty, is that if one is able to
wiite a novelto manipulate woids into thingsthen one must be able to
undeistand things and thoughts bettei than most othei people.
63
All of
which only seives to magnify the contiast between the naiiatoi of Autc-da-
Fe and the naiiatoi of Die Hcsen. Foi though Canettis naiiatoi takes on the
appeaiance of seductive omniscience, we soon come to see that he is diiven
and iiven by incompatible guial inteiests.
The eailiest and most appaient illustiation of this can be seen in a key
scene neai the beginning of Book I of Autc-da-Fe. This situation, paiadig-
matic foi the novels naiiative stiategyand theiefoie a point of iefeience
latei in this studyamply demonstiates the initial collusion of the naiia-
toi with the piotagonist Petei Kien. Foi all we know, the piofessoi is an
innocent bystandei witnessing the following exchange on a Viennese stieet:
Suddenly he heaid someone shouting loudly at someone else: Can you tell
me wheie Mut Stieet is: Theie was no ieply. Kien was suipiised: sc there
were cther silent pecple besides himself tc be fcund in the busy streets. With-
out looking up he listened foi moie. How would the questionei behave in
the face of this silence: . . . Still he said nothing. Kien applauded him . . .
Still the seccnd man said ncthing . . . The incident was taking place on his
_o : moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm
iight hand. The ist man was yelling: Youve no manneis! The second man
was still silent. Then Kien felt a nasty jolt. The othei man, the silent one,
the man with chaiactei, who contiolled his tongue even in angei, was Kien
himself.
64
This passage piovides an eaily lesson on how to iead the novel. Heie (as
elsewheie) the ieadei is duped, albeit tempoiaiily, by a naiiatoi who is ie-
peatedly commandeeied by his chaiacteis. Though we ultimately leain of
the identity of Kien and the second man, we will nevei again be able to
iead so tiustingly. Like all beginneis lessons, this one is faiily elementaiy,
latei on we will not be told so diiectly that the naiiatoi has conspiied with
oi been inhabited byone of the chaiacteis. In fact, we aie as ieadeis en-
couiaged to adopt the veiy cynical attitude that peivades the stoiy itself.
Fai fiomthe cosmic vantage point oeied by the Alexian naiiatoi, Canettis
naiiatoi fails in his essential task to know the woild, a point I will ietuin
to in chaptei _. Rathei than lulled into epistemic secuiity, we aie in fact
called upon continually to engage in an active and not always veiy satisfying
heimeneutic ievisionism.
Having caiefully sifted the claims and counteiclaims of vaiious ciitics ie-
gaiding the naiiative status of diveise passages of the novel, David Daiby
obseives: The conclusion one ieaches fiom conducting such a suivey of
opinions iegaiding the extent of the dieient types of focalization is that the
limits aie extiemely dicult to dene . . . The eect of this almost ubiquitous
ambiguity, along with the tendency of the naiiatoi to slip between focaliz-
eis, undeimines the authenticity of the infoimation discouised thioughout
the novel.
65
Foi Daiby, the novels ciucial conict is essentially inteinecine,
namely that between the chaiacteis and the naiiatoi. Following Dolezels
naiiatological lead, Daiby postulates a battle between the chaiacteis, each
intent upon installing his oi hei own piivate guial belief woild as noima-
tive ieality, and the naiiatoi, who ultimately possesses the authentication
authoiity of the gieatei novel. He declaies the naiiatoi the victoi in this
stiuggle, and thus solves what foi him is the novels gieat iiddlenamely
how ielative claiity pioceeds fiom such ambiguity.
Daibys close ieading eniiches oui undeistanding of the dynamic natuie
of naiiation that chaiacteiizes Autc-da-Fe, but it does not solve the iiddle
entiiely. Foi the intelligibility of these inauthentic iival belief woilds iests
ultimately on theii exclusion of any widei (and theiefoie moie complex)
vision of social ieality. It is fundamentally the highly ieductive and gio-
moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm : _,
tesquely stylized chaiactei of these mutually exclusive woilds that makes
them in the end detectable and amenable to debunking. The panoptic view
we gain on the chaiacteis doomed solipsistic escapades pioceeds less fioma
paiticulaily knowledgeable oi authoiitative naiiatoi, than fiom the chaiac-
teis own highly pioblematic ietieat fiom the inteisubjective, social iealm.
Naiiation in Autc-da-Fe, fai fiom oeiing comfoiting stiuctuie, sets in
motion a piocess of inteiiogation and asciiption. When confionted with
one of those moments of indeteiminacy, the ieadei is put in the uncom-
foitable position of actively employing a set of conveniently disciete steieo-
typesconvenient, that is, fiom the point of view of the heimeneutic task.
Ciassly put, once inducted to the heimeneutics of suspicion and confionted
with the set of steieotyped chaiacteis at oui disposal, we must continually
ask ouiselves questions like these: Does this unit of naiiation sound like the
lecheious Virtschafterin? Is this sciap of speech attiibutable to the money-
giubbing Jew, the pompous piofessoi, oi the bestial Hausbescrger? Though
we may in some cases decode the ostensibly thiid peison naiiation diei-
ently (i.e., attiibute it to anothei guial voice), we all diaw on the steieo-
types intioduced by the novel to make sense of the voices which vaiiously
inhabit the naiiatoi. The novels success at combining peivasive naiiative
ambiguity with plot-level claiity, is theiefoie ultimately to be found not in
naiiatological models, but in the cultuie which puiveys the ieductive and
peinicious clichs on which Canetti so iichly diaws in the ist place.
Autc-da-Fe piovides its own antimodel in the foim of the book given to
Theiese, which sets in motion the disastious maiiiage, and thus the entiie
plot. Canettis paiody of naiiative Blendung should theiefoie be undei-
stood against the blindness of the allegedly omniscient Alexian naiiatoi, the
most glaiing example of which is his obliviousness to, which ieally amounts
to his endoisement of, anti-Semitism. Despite his impiessive geogiaphic and
tempoial command, this naiiatoi, who is otheiwise full of tiuisms, judg-
ments, and platitudes, fails to open his mouth on this (quite liteially) cential
issue in the novel.
Book I of Die Hcsen sets up a symbolic chain of signieis, which em-
ploys the clich of the deceitful Jew: the naiiatoi explicitly associates the
peddlei with the devil and depicts him as conspicuously moneygiubbing.
66
Latei, when Lindenbeig inquiies about the availability of a Jew to solve his
nancial woiiies, his hosts immediately suggest the hawkei Heddeiich.
67
In
the meantime, the cleigyman and Petei Melchioi (of the Biedowclan) have
_8 : moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm
a conveisation that iecapitulates the moial about the Jewish mongei: the
Dechant insists that it is acceptable to cheat the devil (iead: the Jewish ped-
dlei), because he cheats us. Melchioi concedes the lattei statement, but in-
sists that One shouldnt even cheat the devil
68
theieby upholding the
analogy between Jew and devil even while making a moial point. In each
of these cases, it should be noted, the novels moiality extends only to the
injustice of ievenge, the clich itself, the guilty Jew, is nevei questioned.
Lindenbeig latei tells a paiallel stoiy about the tailoi Wiedeband, but, foi
obvious ieasons, Lindenbeigwho is about to attack Heddeiichfully en-
doises the execution of this deceitful and piideful tailoi.
69
Nowall of this may seem oveily subtle foi a populai novel, and indeed it
would be, weie it not foi the oveit pionouncements made at the opening of
Book :. Speaking of von Biedows aiiest foi having ambushed Heddeiich,
the Electois bodyguaid and the couitiei Otteistadt exchange the following
woids: Old man Kiippenieitei has had such misfoitune that hes ambush-
ing a Jew who is tiavelling with his waies to Beilin. A Jew. Oi something
like that.
70
The confusion (oi bettei, equation) of the deceitful, venal ped-
dlei with the Jew continues as the mattei is discussed, and is picked up by
Lindenbeig as an obvious identication when he iesponds to the Electois
queiy: Youi Highness is iefeiiing to yesteidays attack on the Jew, about
which Ive heaid.
71
Up to this point one might still enteitain the possibility that the politi-
cally piogiessive Alexis, who was loosely associated with the }unges Deutsch-
land (Young Geimany) gioup, may be thematizing iathei than undeiwiiting
anti-Semitism.
72
Yet this assumption is misplaced: as Hal Diapei has docu-
mented, many, indeed a majoiity, of Geimanys libeials of this eia weie open
anti-Semites.
73
The possibility of a ciitical peispective on anti-Semitism is
denitively foieclosed when the idealistic young Electoi (whose iight-hand
man the novels young heio becomes) announces: I hate the Jews, Linden-
beig, and plan to tighten the ieign on these unbelieving usuieis, when theii
time comes. Foi they aie and iemain betiayeis of the blood of oui Loid and
Savioi. Yet, even if it weie Simon the thief oi Judas Iscaiiot, who took the
thiity silvei pieces, no one would have the iight, and no one should even
daie, to lay a hand upon himwheie I have ieseived juiisdiction to myself.
74
The Electoi would like to come acioss as noble: despite his pionounced ieli-
gious anti-Semitism (which was widely held to be a defensible position up
to, and in some cases even aftei, the Holocaust),
75
he eneigetically insists on
moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm : _,
banning iogue anti-Semitic vigilantes. But as his ist sentence ieveals, his
hatied towaid Jews is as much economic as ieligious, and he is ieally only ie-
seiving the iight of such violent punishment to himself. Like Biigitte, whose
only objection to beating that knave of a peddlei
76
is that it will iesult in
diiving up the piice of the goods of those peddleis who suivive, the Elec-
tois pionouncement has nothing to do with what he deems to be the essen-
tially guilty and duplicitous Jew. Although Alexis does aoid Joachim some
depth by depicting weaknesses as well as stiengths, the Electoi iemains an
essentially positive guie.
77
His naivete iegaiding the Junkeis insuiiection
and his diaconian punishment of Lindenbeignot, at any iate, his blatant
anti-Semitismconstitute the sins foi which he pays with loneliness.
78
Conveisely, neithei does the eventual iehabilitation of Lindenbeig aect
the bigoted iepiesentation of the Jew.
79
That the novels two gieat adveisaiies
can so ieadily agiee on this single issue, does, howevei, undeicut any lingei-
ing suppositionthat Alexiss poitiayal of anti-Semitismmay somehowyet be
ciitical. The clinching aigument foi Die Hcsen is the naiiatois complicity.
Again in Book : he engages in diabolical desciiption of the peddlei, encoui-
aging the semiotic link, alieady common at the time, connecting peddlei,
devil, tailoi, and Jew.
80
Even moie damning foi this otheiwise loquacious
naiiatoi is his sudden silence on blatant anti-Semitism. Recall that this is
the same naiiatoi, who, on othei occasions, has not hesitated to supply us
with such peails of wisdom as: The mind of man is changeable, to spell
out the alieady evident cautionaiy tale inheient in Hans-Jochems vanity,
to jest about von Biedows modest mental ability, oi to pieach his gospel
of simple living.
81
Iionically, Heddeiichs actual ieligious status iemains in
doubt to the end. Yet, given the ideological cast of the novel, the message
is cleaily not the ielatively enlightened view that Chiistians, too, can be as
iapacious as any otheis, but iathei that one can justiably be mistaken foi
a Jew if one behaves like the venal and dishonest Heddeiich.
Of couise Canetti, too, incoipoiates anti-Semitism in his novel, as we
shall obseive in some detail in chaptei . But wheieas Alexis goes to gieat
lengths to natuialize bigotiy, the iacial and gendei steieotypes of Autc-da-
Fe viitually jump o the page. The ieadei of Die Hcsen, as we have seen,
is meant to identify with the iacist naiiatoi, the ieadei of Autc-da-Fe is
painfully confionted with giotesque caiicatuies that ciy out to be undei-
stood against the cultuie that fosteied and piopagated them. The Alexian
text, I am aiguing, seives up bigotiy (and othei comfoiting tiuisms) in
o : moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm
the comfoit of a heimetically packaged histoiical naiiative that seived in
the inteiwai peiiod to insulate ieadeis fiom a disconceiting political and
social ieality. In contiast, Canettis is viitually a know-nothing naiiatoi,
moie placeholdei than identiable peisona. Though theie exists an undeni-
able naiiative voiceas when Fischeiles muidei and Kiens suicide aie ie-
countedit is simply not the voice of pacifying authoiity. And if the naiia-
toi ultimately wins that naiiative battle against the novels chaiacteis, it
is a Pyiihic victoiy in which he iemains theii sometime hostage.
Peihaps the best evidence that naiiation in Autc-da-Fe is moie a vexing
question than a quenching font of epistemological authoiity comes fiomie-
ception data. To use Daviss teim, one can condently state that this is not
a novel that needs iesistingit seems to have piovoked that iesponse all
on its own. Fai fiom Geoigs conception of ieading as mindless sex, ieadeis
of Autc-da-Fe have often enough iepoited theii displeasuie: one thinks im-
mediately of Hans Magnus Enzensbeigeis famous desciiption of the novel
as a liteiaiy monstei (ein literarisches Mcnstrum), oi of Maicel Reich-
Ranickis peiemptoiy pionouncement that it is ungeniebaiunpalat-
able, not meiely unenjoyable.
A good deal of this diculty can be tiaced to the naiiative stiategy that
fails to piovide a ieady-made peispective fiom which to view the insidious
steieotypes that inhabit the novel. Reading, and ieieading, is so annoying
because just when we hope to pin some execiable asseition on the naiia-
toi, we discovei that hiding in an appaiently objective naiiative voice is a
focalized mind-set aftei alloi at least the distinct possibility of one. What
fiustiates the ieadei is not the piocess of asciiption itselfthe attiibution of
some appaiently gnomic statement to a paiticulai guiebut the fact that
it foices us, at least piovisionally, to adopt as a necessaiy heimeneutic de-
vice the veiy steieotypes we would otheiwise eschew. We must continually
ieheaise and deploy anti-Jewish, misogynistic, and othei clichd and base
conceptions just to iead the novel. Peihaps in so doing, we aie unpleasantly
ieminded of the fact that, as Sandei Gilman aigues, we ioutinely employ
such steieotypes in oui eveiyday thinking.
82
The novel is iife with peitinent examples.
83
But since a close ieading of
a moie than ve-hundied-page novel on this question is neithei possible
noi desiiable (and because fuithei illustiations will be given in subsequent
chapteis), one example, fiom a passage alieady quoted, will seive to dem-
onstiate this phenomenon. In the discussion of Geoig, above, we iead what
moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm : I
appeais to be an obvious bit of naiiatoi-based desciiption: In his featuies
theie was something of that gentleness which women need befoie they can
feel at home with a man.
84
Once we discovei Geoigs inciedible ego, his
benevolent-sounding but unmistakable misogyny, and the ability he shaies
with his fellow chaiacteis to inltiate the naiiative voice, we will want to
asciibe this poition of the desciiption (and peihaps even moie) to the self-
aggiandizing consciousness of Geoig himself. In this way, we aie constantly
challenged to asciibe what ist appeais to be authoiial naiiation to one of
the ctional chaiacteis who essentially has taken on the mantle of naiia-
toi. This ceaseless dynamic between the initial impiession of zeio focaliza-
tion and the eventual deteimination of inteinal focalization compiises
not meiely a foimal ienement iegaiding the iepiesentation of conscious-
ness in liteiatuie,
85
but an impoitant social admonition: Those authoiities,
like the Alexian naiiatoi, who lay claim to magisteiial cultuial peispectives
need to be examined ciitically foi the special and paitial inteiests that may
be luiking beneath theii omniscience. Theie will inevitably be some dis-
agieement in this mammoth text about piecisely who is speaking wheie.
What we aie no longei peimitted to do, howevei, is to asciibe unpioblem-
atically such foundational utteiances to a tiustwoithy, neutial, and stable
naiiative voice. Adducing the naiiatoi as the basis foi a denitive inteipie-
tation of Autc-da-Festill a faiily common occuiience in the secondaiy lit-
eiatuieis theiefoie something ieadeis should gieet with suspicion. Foi in
Autc-da-Fe we know only who these chaiacteis claim to benot who they
essentially aie.
As a tianslatoi of thiee Upton Sinclaii novels foi the leftist MalikVeilag, a
task he latei desciibed as a meie sustenance job (eine Biotaibeit), Canetti
became an expeit on populai, socially engaged iealism in the inteiwai pe-
iiod. In citing and paiodying the beloved Alexis in Autc-da-Fe, Canetti
oeis not a bioadside on liteiaiy iealism pei sefoi he continued to ieveie
Balzac and Zola as exemplaiy piactitioneis of the genie
86
but a much moie
specic ciitique of histoiicizing escapist tendencies and seductive naiiative
stiuctuies that conspiie to make liteiatuie the veiy anesthetizing, insulai
activity Geoig held it to be.
If tiuth be told, Canetti was not paiticulaily inteiested in liteiaiy classi-
cations, even if he was acutely awaie of liteiaiy and cultuial developments
in geneial. Like his modeinist contempoiaiies, he was inteiested in iepie-
senting the modein woild, the newieality (neue Virklichkeit) of the post
: : moiivi sm .s v.voiv oi vov0i.v vi.ii sm
Woild Wai I eia, which he felt demanded new modes of expiession. In ie-
ecting on the genesis of his novel, Canetti wiites: I told myself that I would
build spotlights with which I could illuminate the woild fiom outside.
87
This iemains a valuable wayof viewing Autc-da-Feas outside oui eveiyday
woild, yet designed to illuminate it. Consideiing the vaiious novels cited in
Autc-da-Fe yields pioductive insights that claiify Canettis own pioject. Yet
this discussion also poses the dangei of skewing the novel. Foi if Autc-da-Fe
weie to be iead meiely as a paiticipant in a liteiaiy debate, this would only
seive to ieinfoice the veiy insulai escapism the novel seeks to challenge and
oveicome.
: The tiuth is youie a woman.
You live foi sensations.
Misogyny as Cultuial Ciitique
When Canetti nds in Bioch the necessaiy attiibutes of a gieat wiiteihe is
oiiginal, he sums up his age, he opposes his agehe is delineating the
standaids to which he has pledged himself.
Susan Sontag
1
Youie always polite, you woman, youie like Eve . . . Take a iest fiom all this
femininity! Maybe youll become human again.
Petei Kien to his biothei Geoig
2
False Staits: Towaid a New Ciitical Paiadigm
Recently, ciitics have begun to woiiy about misogyny in Autc-da-Fe.
Rathei than viewit as pait of the oveiall paiodic stiuctuie of the novel, how-
evei, they tend to submit theii ndings uigently, like investigative iepoiteis
who have just discoveied coiiuption in city hall. Richaid H. Lawson aleits
us, foi example, to Canettis consideiable misogyny,
3
and iegiets that the
novel contains a seiies of misogynistic aphoiisms that peihaps passed as
amusing in the I,_os, foi example: Women aie illiteiates, unenduiable and
stupid, a peipetual distuibance.
4
If Lawson seems willing to let us o with
a geneial soit of waining, Jenna Feiiaia is less foigiving. She indicts the nai-
iatoi foi submeiging womens voices, and Canetti himself foi encoding in
this ction his own deep-seated hatied of women.
5
Ultimately, she contends,
the novel iecommends Annathe sexually abused daughtei of the building
supeiintendentas an exemplum of female subseivience. Most iecently
and most spectaculailyKiistie Foell has suggested that the unfoitunate
message of at least one scene of the novel is that women want to be iaped
: mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i
and that they] make accusations of iape out of a sense of sexual fiustiation.
Theieses confused desiies play into the myth that women deseive what they
get, whethei iape, poveity, oi muidei,
6
similai pionouncements can be
found thioughout hei iecent monogiaph. If such ciitics have espoused dis-
putable claims, they neveitheless deseive a good deal of ciedit foi diawing
oui attention to a ciucial and thus fai iathei neglected aspect of the novel.
7
When confionted with this kind of ideological ciiticisma soit of head-
hunting expedition foi peinicious steieotypesone is necessaiily ieminded
of Shoshana Felmans pathbieaking coiiective to psychoanalytic ciiticism,
in which she ieminded fellowciitics (who weie then chuining out faiily pie-
dictable Fieudian inteipietations) that sex is not the answei, but the ongoing
question.
8
Peihaps the same should be said of ideological ciiticism at this
junctuie: locating insidious steieotyping is not itself the end of the puisuit.
What is needed, iathei, is caieful analysis of the laigei matiix of ideas and lit-
eiaiy stiategies within which these steieotypes appeai. Only then could we
ask whethei (and how) the ieadei is encouiaged to accept, ieject, oi question
the piejudice in question.
Yet such attention to the laigei constellation of liteiaiy stiategies is pie-
cisely what one misses. Oveilooking what is peihaps the hallmaik of this
modeinist novel, the iionically poious naiiatoi, these ciitics have instead
posited the tiaditional naiiatoi of liteiaiy iealism in oidei to anchoi theii
iespective aigument about the novels misogyny.
9
While Canettis naiiatoi
employs the foimal pieiogatives of the tiaditional stoiytellei (thiid peison,
the tense of naiiation, gnomic utteiances), the novel itself pulls the iug of
ieliability out fiom beneath him, disciediting his putative authoiity and in-
dependence. Thioughout the novel the naiiatoi embodies moie the desiie to
speak univeisally, objectively, oi in the voice of nineteenth-centuiy Vissen-
schaft than any unquestioned ability to do so. Canettis meicuiial naiiatoi is
iepeatedly inltiated by the novels cast of chaiacteis, and the ieadei quickly
leains to suspect that the claims issued by the naiiatoi typically emeige fiom
quite vested inteiests. At best, the naiiatoi of Autc-da-Fe is ieliably unieli-
able, and thus a foundation incapable of suppoiting such weightyallegations
of misogyny.
10
It iemains a iiddle howa ieadei could be inteipolated oi sutuied into (to
boiiowteims fiomstiuctuialism) this allegedly nefaiious text. The failuie to
demonstiate this pioposition is ciucial, foi the bioad expeiience of ieadeis
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : ,
indicates a continual falling out of the stoiy iathei than the expeiience of
being comfoitably buckled in. While Reich-Ranickis pionouncement of the
novel as indigestible may ultimately seem unfaii, he is ceitainly coiiect
that the ieadei is in no way seduced into a state of unieective stupoi. In
fact, the novels iemaikable humoi depends to a gieat extent on the ieadeis
epistemic soveieignty ovei the distoited and limited woilds each chaiactei
takes to be utteily ieal, natuial, and univeisally valid. Peihaps these lattei-
day muckiakeis should give some ciedit to the novel itself, foi it is a text
that foiegiounds and questions those misogynistic steieotypes, iathei than
one that insidiously deploys them as natuial.
Befoie pioceeding diiectly to this aigument, howevei, let us biiey ie-
visit the question: Why the hesitancy to giant this paiodic possibility in the
ist place: Pait of the accusatoiy postuie taken by the ciitics mentioned
above may be attiibutable to two additional and ielatedthough up to this
point inexplicitfactois of feminist ciiticism of the novel. Fiist is the fail-
uie to deploy with histoiic specicity the teim misogyny, despite the fact
that the meaning of the woid has evolved signicantly fiom the beginning
of the centuiy to the piesent day. One need not assume, foi example, that
Canetti evolved into a model feminist as the teim came to be dened fiom
the I,,os onwaid, in oidei to giasp his ciitique of misogyny as it was piessed
into seivice duiing the eaily decades of this centuiy to solve the celebiated
ciisis of the self. The second factoi that may have inhibited ciitics fiom
seeing the novels misogyny as pait and paicel of the texts oveiall paiodic
stiuctuie is the piemise of the Anglo-Ameiican appioach to feminist litei-
aiy ciiticism, which chaiacteiizes all the afoiesaid studies. Such ciitics aie
foievei tiying to iedeem the novels women, paiticulaily Theiese. With ie-
gaid to Autc-da-Fe this is fiankly a doomed enteipiise. Any attempt to ie-
covei Theieses supposed inteiioiity is bound to be stymied by the haid fact
that none of the chaiacteis is psychologically iealistic. Stiessing the novels
oveit aitice in this iegaid, Canetti once said to Heimann Bioch: These
aie gures, not ieal people.
11
Moieovei, the novel cannot be made ovei to
be fundamentally about women: in point of fact, it is a iich paiody of mens
(paiticulaily Petei and Geoig Kiens) distoited views of women and the
feminine, and thus can nevei satisfy ciitics seaiching foi a stoiy centeied
onoi oeiing equal time tofemale subjects. That would simply be a dif-
feient novel.
o : mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i
Thiee Obsolete Women
If misogyny in Autc-da-Fe is neithei some distasteful by-pioduct of an
otheiwise gieat novel, noi meiely the peinicious ideological vestige of a
chauvinist authoi, one needs to confiont the question with a new paia-
digm. Rathei than the puiveyoi of ietiogiade thinking, Autc-da-Fe is in
fact iemaikably piogiessive. Not only because the self-conscious and pei-
vasive deployment of misogyny takes ciitical aim at the contempoianeous
clichs of gendeinotably, as Podei has shown, by citing and inveiting
Otto Weiningeis widely iead Geschlecht und Charakter (Sex and Chaiactei,
I,o_)but also in its encoding of what is geneially taken to be a faiily ie-
cent ienement in thinking on gendei: the distinction between the social
constiuction of gendei ioles and the biologically given status of sex. This
disjunction of sex and gendei is bioadly evident in Theieses insistence on
hei conjugal iights as well as hei adamant iefusal to accept Kiens attempt
to iestiict hei iole to that of mothei-libiaiian. The gendei[sex distinction is
peihaps nowheie cleaiei than in Kiens absuid (yet telling) pionouncement
that his biothei Geoig is, essentially, a woman.
This iuptuie, howevei much it may contiibute to the dislodging of tia-
ditional gendei stiictuies, should be seen piimaiily in light of the novels
staging of the epistemological dilemma implied in the peculiaily male ciisis
of the self. The misogyny woithyof investigationconsists theiefoie not inthe
faiily obvious deiision of female guies, but in the novels gendeied stiuc-
tuiing of the epistemological exchange, inwhichwoman oi the feminine
guies thioughout as the thing to be known. Foi the philologist Petei Kien
she is both the insciutable text (waiting to be authoiitatively decoded) and
China, foi the psychiatiist Geoig she is the quintessence of insanity, pas-
sively and appieciatively awaiting his maivelous tieatments. She is, iespec-
tively, mothei and demimonde. But what she may nevei be, of couise, is a
cognitively coequal paitnei capable of hei own ciisis of subjectivity.
Looking at the novels misogyny in this way helps us to see the iepiesen-
tation of woman not only as a synchionic, geneialized ciitique of woefully
sexist images, but also as a quite time-specic pioduct of the histoiically
conditioned ciisis of subjectivity. Well befoie Heimann Bahi pionounced
the self unsalvageable (Das uniettbaie Ich, I,o), Austiian intellectuals
had been debating the implications of what Judith Ryan has dubbed The
Vanishing Subject. It was piecisely this spectei of an attenuated empiii-
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : ,
cal self, Steven Bellei aigues, that inspiied OttoWeiningeis infamous opus,
and though the contempoiaiy debate on the self was peihaps most explicitly
conducted in academic ciicles, it also had unmistakable political iamica-
tions in the foimof collectivist and iiiationalist movements of the eaily pait
of this centuiy.
12
Yet the moie piecise impulse behind Autc-da-Fe, which
was begun in I,_o, was not so much this ongoing anxiety about the self, but
those questionable attempts (above all Weiningeis) pioposed to sclve that
ciisis. The late modeinist novel Autc-da-Fe can theiefoie be viewed most
pioductively as an epiphenomenon of modeinity, oi as a kind of modeinism
once iemoved. Canettis specic contiibution, as we shall see ingieatei detail
below, is not only to diawoui attention to the gendeied status of the subject,
but moie specically to indict the canonical high Geiman (and Euiopean)
constiuction of cultuie foi enshiining misogyny as both noimal and noima-
tive. The only chaiacteis given enough psychological depth to sustain any
kind of ciisis of identity aie, of couise, Geoig and Kien. And both attempt
to use woman to manage theii diculties: to shoie up a dissolving self (as
in the case of Kien), oi to tiade in an obsolete self (Geoig). Woman in the
novel, let us be cleai about this fiom the beginning, is laigely the piojec-
tion of despeiate men. That these biotheis can conduct theii exploits undei
the dignied covei of high cultuie, howevei, bioadens the novels ciitique
consideiably.
Fiist, it may be helpful to followout the line of questioning implicit in the
image of woman appioach to feminist inquiiy in oidei fully to appieciate
the novels ciitique of misogyny as a ciutch to male identity. Wheie do the
peiveise images of woman oiiginate: Ceitainly Kien is a quite feitile souice
foi this kind of invective: indeed he liteially ieconstiucts Theiese as whoie,
ieasoning that he had not fully undeistood hei tiue piofession until he
iecognizes hei again in the peison of the Pensionistin (Fischeiles piosti-
tute, whose dependable pation has eained hei this title), foi Kien a second
Theiese.
13
Fischeile, Pfa, and even the puipoitedly good biothei Geoig
all contiibute theii own inventive biand of misogyny. Although a considei-
able quantity of woman hatied emanates fiom the male chaiacteis, it would
be quite mistaken to oveilook the fact that the novels women aie iathei sim-
plistic types well befoie the novels men get theii hands (oi, in the case of
Kien, theii minds) on them. It is also tiue that the naiiatoi is no aimative
action employei: Theiese does not command neaily as many pages as Kien,
noi is hei veibal iepeitoiy any match foi the mastei philologist. The same
8 : mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i
could be said foi Anna, the Fischeiin, and the othei female guies. Like the
men, the women aie comic types, unlike the men they aie distinctly moie
limited in eveiy imaginable way. Having noted the dual souice of the novels
images of woman does not, howevei, ieinstate the chaige of naiiatoiial oi
authoiial misogyny. Those female images, as yet unmaiked by the eoits of
male guies to appiopiiate and iefunction them, iepiesent the cultuial cli-
chs of the day: woman as mothei, housekeepei, whoie, damsel in distiess
(Anna), maityi (the Fischeiin). All, ianging fiom the combative and self-
asseitive Theiese to the self-abasing Fischeiin, seive to fulll male fantasies,
male caieeis, and male pleasuies.
Let us ist cast a glance at the novels auxiliaiy female guies, Anna
and the Fischeiin. Both aie holdovei types fiom nineteenth-centuiy cul-
tuie, easily iecognizable fiom populai liteiatuie and opeia of the peiiod.
Canettis deployment of these guies pioceeds in the spiiit of hypeibolic
paiody, a teim developed by Elisabeth Bionfen to desciibe the stiategy of,
foi example, Maigaiet Atwood.
14
This appioachpaiticulaily well exempli-
ed by Canettis novelattempts to oveicome steieotypes not by avoiding
them, but by giving themfiee beith to self-destiuct. Obviously this method,
which Bionfen calls complicity as ciitique,
15
does not pioduce many good
women in the sense of models foi extialiteiaiy women. Canettis poitiayal
of the absuidity of the female type is an assault on the cultuial institutions
that continue to puivey gendeied stiaitjackets in the foim of outmoded,
sentimental female guies. In the guies of the Fischeiin and Anna in pai-
ticulai, Canetti diaws out the appeal anddening chaiacteiistic of the female
maityi[victim: hei uttei expendability foi male puiposes.
The Fischeiin, by all accounts a minoi guie, suggests a tiagic modica-
tion of the Papagena guie fiomMozaits Die Zaubercte (The Magic Flute,
I,,I). In that famous opeia, Papagena is the luscious piize foi Papageno,
the buoon counteipait to the piotagonist Tamino. While an acknowledged
musical masteipiece, Die Zaubercte as libietto opeiates on a comically sim-
plistic gendeied binaiy opposition between the eviland ultimately van-
quishedQueen of the Night and the patiiaichal seat of all wisdom and
light, Saiastio. Papageno pioves himself woithy of his look-alike biide by
enduiing ceitain abstentions (albeit with consideiable shoitcomings) en-
foiced by the sacied piiesthood. Essential foi the inteitextual allusion, how-
evei, is the memoiable and enteitaining childishness of Papageno. Unlike
his counteipait Tamino, Papageno nevei quite matuies. His life pioceeds
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : ,
in an idyllic foiest, and his woik is nothing but play: he catches beautiful
biids foi the queen-mothei and ieceives in ietuin his daily biead and wine.
If it is delicious (kcstlich), as it always is when he behaves, he is content.
In the make-believe woild of peipetual childhood, Papageno has but one
wish: a biide just like himself. The comic and fecund paiiing of Papageno
with Papagena paiallels the opeias moie seiious coupling of Tamino with
Pamina. Tiue to Noithiup Fiyes conception of comedy, the opeia ends in a
double maiiiage. This much at least Canetti could have expected of his iead-
eiship. The citation of Papagena in the guie of the Fischeiin is not haid to
iecognize: the female hunchbacked dwaif with a Jewish long nose is simul-
taneously an evocation of the Papagena disguised as hideous cione (i.e., be-
foie hei metamoiphosis into the bucolic blond beauty), and Fischeiles exact
physical counteipait. The modication, howevei, is double: not only does
Canettis hag iemain a hag, but moie impoitant theie is the alteiation im-
plicit in Fischeiles antagonistic ielationship to the Fischeiin. In Mozaits
opeia, Papageno gets his giil foi obeying, moie oi less, the advice of the old
woman (and, by extension, the guidelines of the piiestly sect). He was, in
othei woids, iewaided foi being a good boy. Canetti diaws out this aspect
by making Fischeile peihaps even moie a child than Papageno. Fischeile
has no use foi his look-alike would-be lovei foi two ieasons: Fiist, and foie-
most, he is attached to the Pensionistin (the Capitalist in the Wedgwood
tianslation) as a boy to a mothei. Foi she loved him, he claims (inltiat-
ing the naiiatois voice), he was hei child.
16
At the pivotal moment when
Fischeile might conceivably launch his voyage to Ameiica he is compelled
to ietuin to say goodbye to mothei, to spend one moie comfoiting houi
in the ciadle undei hei bed. Hed have liked to cieep undei the bed once
moie in faiewell, that was the ciadle of his futuie caieei . . . hed found in it
a peace unknown in any caf.
17
It is fiom this piotected site that Fischeile
habitually expeiiences the Fieudian piimal scene (Urszene) between his
mateinal Pensionistin and one oi anothei of hei paying customeis.
The Fischeiins iejectionis foieoidainedbya second, ielatedfactoi. Fisch-
eile iepiesents a veiy self-consciously diawn caiicatuie of the self-hating
Jew. As such, Fischeile cannot possibly accept his veiitable miiioi image as
spouse oi lovei. (His actual miiioi image, one may iecall, is only good foi
pioducing eminent, but beatable and despicably Jewish, chess opponents.)
His fantasy woman, with the emphasis on fantasy, is a iich, tall, Ameiican
blond whose chief diawing caid is hei ability to nance Fischeiles own as-
,o : mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i
similationandacceptance ingentile society. Fischeiles make-believe biide is
thus an Aiyan beauty into which this misshapen and all too Jewish look-
ing cione cannot possibly metamoiphose. No chance in this fantasywhich
iesonates, as we shall see below in chaptei , with the iising tide of iacial
anti-Semitismfoi the hunchbacked, lthy, Jewish newspapei peddlei.
In playing on the Fischeiin[Papagena connection, Canetti diaws out the
essential component of male piojection in cieating a female ccunterpart.
The piinciple of complementaiity that undeilies binaiy gendei classica-
tions in Westein thought (and explicitly evident in Weiningeis categoiies)
is heie pilloiied as a meiely appaient complementaiity that is essentially a
one-sided piojection. Canetti cites and inveits the tiadition of the match
made in heaventhey meet in the pub The Stais of Heaven (Zumidealen
Himmel )bydiawing the Fischeiin as the object of abusive iejection, iathei
than as the comic iesolution of plot. The Fischeiin emeiges as an outmoded
female type who no longei seives to iesolve the diamatic conict, and thus
elicits the humoi of incongiuity foi those familiai with hei cultuial piecui-
soi(s). This is just one of Canettis many einste Scheize (seiious jokes) told
ovei the heads of his own chaiacteis.
It is chaiacteiistic and telling that in oidei to elucidate the iole of the
Fischeiin one must tell the stoiy of Fischeile: that, in a nutshell, is the point.
Canetti is diawing oui attention to female guies who aie little moie (in the
case of the Fischeiin, ncthing moie) than the ieection of male chaiacteis,
meie adjuncts to male development plots. The Fischeiin is signicant not
only in what she invokes and fails to fulll, but also in hei additional iole
as maityi. Foi she stands by hei man until death does them pait, a saciice
not iemotely hinted at in the iole of Papagena. This tiagic tuin iesults pie-
cisely fiom the identical outwaid appeaiance of Fischeile and the Fischeiin.
The event follows upon the encountei between Kien and the book-pawning
team of Pfa and Theiese. Kien appiehends Theiese, Pfa iestiains Kien,
and the police aie called in stiaight away. The ciowd outside diaws its own
evei-changing conclusions, deciding ultimately that the diity little man with
the Jew nose ( }udennase) is the guilty culpiit deseiving of vigilante-style
justice. They pioceed to beat him quite seveiely, he is saved only when the
Fischeiin shows up and is mistaken foi Fischeile. She is muideied in his
stead.
Ciitics accustomed toviewing the novel thiough the optics of Crcwds and
Pcwer tend to see in this scene a ciiticism of ciowd behavioi, of the Masse
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : ,I
Figure :. Fischerles rejecticn cf his lcck-alike }ewish paramcur in favcr cf a tall,
blue-eyed blcnd is echced in the anti-Semitic caricature cf the day, as in this circa-
:;,, cartccn frcm Kurt Plischkes Dei Jude als Rassenschandei. United States
Hclccaust Memcrial Museum Phctc Archives.
whose thiist foi excitement and ievenge is blind. Tiue enough. But the cii-
tique is moie complex: the death of the Fischeiin is the death of the type,
a ievelation of the essential nonliving status of woman as a male look-alike
piojection. In fashioning the Fischeiin, Canetti seeks to ietiie an obsolete
cultuial iepiesentation of woman, as well as exploie its motivations. Yet this
undeistanding of the Fischeiin as a female chaiactei type cleaily does not
exhaust hei meaning in the novel. In fact, focusing exclusivelyon the topic of
misogyny can easily distiact fiom the conciete anti-Jewish feivoi, which so
cleaily contiibutes to hei muidei. Moieovei, Fischeiles iejection of this vii-
tual miiioi image because of hei inescapably Jewish physical maikeis in
favoi of an imagined Aiyan beauty suggests the peitinence of the Fischeiin
to oui discussion of iacial anti-Semitism below in chaptei .
None of the novels guies evokes empathetic identication, with the
tempoiaiy exception of Geoig, as we have noted. But if the Fischeiin elicits
any ieaction fiom the ieadei, it is piobably foiemost the feeling that she is
pathetic. This much at least she has in common with the guie of Anna, the
unfoitunate daughtei of the biutal Hausbesoigei Benedikt Pfa. To undei-
Figure ,. Fischerles fantasy cf American success includes a fancy chaueured
car, as in this :;,, cartccn, titled The Martyr Abrcad, frcm the magazine
Biennessel. These cnlcckers, hcwever, are nct the adcring crcwds cf Fischerles
vain imaginaticn, but resentful cbservers whc immediately identify the prcspercus
man as a }ew (as Fischerle suspected wculd happen even in America), and suggest
(in the German capticn) that }ews whc emigrate with such wealth cculd nct have
faced much hardship in Germany in the rst place. Bildarchiv Preuischer Kultur-
besitz, phctc ccurtesy United States Hclccaust Memcrial Museum Phctc Archives.
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : ,_
stand how in the guie of Anna Canetti is diawing on a mainstieam of Gei-
man liteiaiy tiadition, it will be necessaiy ist to ieview the folktale milieu
that is cleaily the inspiiation foi this daughtei in distiess. We tuin, of couise,
to the Biotheis Giimm, those intiepid folktale collectois and woidsmiths of
the nineteenth centuiy whose philological feivoi was deeply iooted in the
Geiman nationalism of the day. As in the case of the Fischeiin[Papagena,
the citation is mixed but unmistakable.
Anna is a folktale guie who cannot become a faiiy tale heioine: she is
stuck in that iealistic ist pait of the faiiy tale maiked by natuialistic expo-
sition. In this case it is an account of biutal victimization at the hands of hei
own fathei. But hei stoiy fails to abide by that fundamental law of faiiy
tales] iequiiing the ieveisal of all conditions pievailing in its intioductoiy
paiagiaphs.
18
Anna does indeed dieam of a iescuing heio in the foim of
the local gioceiy boy, but the ctional woild of Autc-da-Fe simply fails to
iespond to hei iomantic desiies and fantasies of ievenge: the gioceiy cleik
botches the buiglaiy and fails to delivei Pfas head on a plattei. The faiiy
tales movement fiom victimization to ietaliation
19
theiefoie takes place
only in the imagination of the beaten and beleagueied daughtei.
Instead of iescue she sueis numeious beatings, iape, and piegnancy.
Finally she is left by hei fathei to die. Anna is, ina sense, the modeinincaina-
tion of Alleileiiauh (Thousandfuis), but without any of the supeinatuial
assistance accoided that heioine. Again, the iefeience is all but subtle. In the
Giimms tale, the fathei of young Thousandfuis (Alleileiiauh) . . . piom-
ises his wife on hei deathbed that he will iemaiiy only if he nds a woman
whose beauty equals that of his quickly fading spouse. When the kings en-
voys ietuin fiom a woildwide seaich foi a second wife to announce that
they have failed in theii mission, the kings eye lights on his daughtei, and
he is oveicome by passion foi hei.
20
Benedikt Pfa of Autc-da-Fe is not so
sciupulous: Soon aftei this change his wife died, of oveistiain . . . On the
day aftei the funeial his honeymoon began. Moie undistuibed than befoie,
he tieated his daughtei as he pleased.
21
In The Hard Facts cf the Grimms Fairy Tales, Maiia Tatai explains the
suppiessed centiality of the incest theme in this genie: it is the obveise of the
moie fiequently noted jealous evil stepmothei motif. Since the ielation-
ship of the two tale types may not be widely undeistood, it is woith quoting
hei elucidation at length: In tales depicting eiotic peisecution of a daughtei
by hei fathei . . . motheis and stepdaughteis tend to vanish fiom the cential
, : mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i
aiena of action. Yet the fatheis desiie foi his daughtei in the second tale type
fuinishes a poweiful motive foi a stepmotheis jealous iages and unnatuial
deeds in the ist tale type. The two plots theieby conveniently dovetail to
pioduce an intiigue that coiiesponds almost peifectly to the Oedipal fanta-
sies of female childien. In this way faiiy tales aie able to stage the Oedipal
diama even as they disguise it by eliminating one of its two essential compo-
nents.
22
Wheieas a tale such as Alleileiiauh might peimit us to speculate
whethei we aie ieading about a daughteis fantasy of an amoious fathei
as opposed to an actual fatheis peiveise eiotic attachment,
23
Canettis ie-
insciiption of this faiiy tale guie allows no doubt as to the oiigin of the
desiie and violence. The benets to the child, which, as Biuno Bettelheim
famouslyexpoundedthem, iesult fiompsychologically woiking thioughthe
oedipal diama, aie of absolutely no value if the fantasies and desiies aie all
the fatheis. Annas diama is ielegated to the feckless fantasy of a nonexistent
male savioi. Pfas is the ieal diama, and in this Anna has a meie suppoiting
iole.
As in the case of the Fischeiin[Papagena, the cultuial allusion becomes
in the hands of Canetti a iathei moie complex alloy. If the male piojection
involved in the constiuction of the Fischeiin was piimaiily visual, heie it
takes the foimof a ciuel veibal game. Anna must ieinfoice Pfas self-image
as the good fathei (der gute Vater)in a chaptei of the same name which
Canetti iemembeis having peifoimed at fiequent public ieadingsby com-
pleting his sentences. It is a debased veision of that type of polite Viennese
conveisation espoused by Altenwyl (of Hofmannsthals Der Schwierige),
the puipose of which is to piovide youi paitnei the key conveisational
piompt (dem andern das Stichwcrt jzu] bringen):
She gets hei keep fiom . . . . . . hei good fathei.
Othei men do not want . . . . . . to have hei. . . .
Now hei fatheis going to . . . . . . aiiest hei.
On fatheis knee sits . . . . . . his obedient daughtei.
Hei fathei knows why he . . . . . . thiashes hei.
My daughtei isnt evei . . . . . . huit.
Shes got to leain what she . . . . . . owes to hei fathei.
24
This exeicise is a foimof veibal and semiotic extoition and seives to undei-
scoie Annas enfoiced iole as ieectoi oi function (in the mathematical
sense) of hei fatheis ego. Like the faiiy tales that haiboi fathei-daughtei
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : ,,
incest in theii subtext (oi in alteinate veisions),
25
Anna heiself is enlisted to
covei ovei the fatheis violence and iemake him in the image of the kind
fathei.
If Canettis point with iespect to the Fischeiin is to desentimentalize foi-
evei the submissive, self-saciicing iepiesentation of woman, with iegaid to
Anna it is to demonstiate the absuidity of the notion that a womans powei
and fieedom is iooted piimaiily in imagination and fantasy. In both cases
he diaws oui attention to clichd cultuial iepiesentations of women that
seiveduntil, peihaps, theii iefunctioning inAutc-da-Feto disguise theii
souice in male inteiests. Yet heie, too, Canettis ciitique is multivalent. Anna
belongs theiefoie not only to the discussion of female types and steieotypes,
but also plays a cential iole in the novels iejection of Fieudian notions that
inteiioiize ieal, inteisubjective violenceas I aigue below in gieatei detail
in chaptei ,.
As in the cases of the Fischeiin and Anna, let us considei Theiese ist
as she is given to us by the naiiatoi, apait fiom the misogynistic aspei-
sions geneiously heaped upon hei by Kien and Pfa. Foi she is a type befoie
she enteis the plotindeed she iemains viitually unchanged thioughout.
She is a lowei class, faiily obese, and imposing woman, who has spent hei
entiie caieei as a domestic seivant. She is in addition a social climbei foi
whom maiiiage is the means of enteiing the iespectable middle class, and,
of couise, she is a woman with an unabashed and laigely unsatiated sexual
appetite. She is diawn, on the suiface at least, as the diametiical opposite of
Kien. In hei mateiiality, eshliness, gieed, and thick aliation with com-
meice and money she iepiesents the antithesis to hei husbands putative
intellect, Geist, and oveiall aloofness to things of this woild. Not suipiis-
ingly, this opposition is advanced iionically, consisting laigely of Kiens own
manifest self-delusions.
Theiese makes hei debut as a fty-six-yeai-old Virtschafterin, a maid
who cooks and cleans foi the foity-yeai-old scholai. She makes hei gieatest
impiession, howevei, in pioviding fastidious caie foi Kiens books. It is this
which eains hei the shoit-lived epithet, a sublime spiiit (eine grcartige
Seele).
26
Indeed, hei touching solicitude foi The Trcusers cf Herr vcn Bre-
dcw
27
moves Kien to piopose maiiiage: With some ceiemony she selected
a suitable piece of papei and wiapped it aiound the book like a shawl iound
a baby . . . He had undeiestimated hei. She knew how to handle a book
bettei than he did.
28
The compaiison of book to baby is apt: foi this is pie-
,o : mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i
cisely the function Kien envisions foi heimothei to his libiaiy. But if he
maiiies to gain a mateinal guie to nuituie his chaiges, he is veiy quickly
disabused of this notion. On his wedding night Kien nds to his dismay that
luiking within the appaiently loyal, motheily domestic is a monstious
sexual appetite. Up to this point Theiese may be said to incoipoiate a good
many contempoiaiy cultuial clichs iegaiding women as, foi example, cata-
logued by Weiningei. Yet to those familiai with the Geiman liteiaiy canon,
Theiese evokes a moie specic liteiaiy piedecessoi: she is the ieincaination
and ievision of Lene fiom Geihait Hauptmanns widely iead Bahnwarter
Thiel (Stationmastei Thiel, I888).
29
Eiic Downing has suggested that in ieading the liteiatuie of the Geiman
nineteenth centuiy we look to the female guies foi the encapsulation of the
iespective aesthetic piogiam.
30
With iegaid to Hauptmann, it is cleai that
Lene is advanced as the beaiei of that ieally ieal iealism, namely Natuial-
ism. She piovides a staik contiast not only to the etheieal ist wife, Minna,
but also to the moie sensitive and spiiitual Thiel himself. Tiue, the station-
mastei is no intellect, yet he is the village pedagogue and cultivates an in-
waidness totally alien to Lene. The dichotomy is theiefoie essentially the
same as in Autc-da-Fe. Until the biutal nal scenes of Hauptmanns novella,
at which point Thiel is in any case coded as insane (and thus not his foimei
self ), Thiel iepiesents the highei, spiiitual values of the Romantic past, while
his iobust and coipulent wife stands foi the biutal violence of modein life. It
is suiely no coincidence that Tobiass death is due as much to the negligence
of Lene as to that haibingei of technical modeinity, the locomotive.
It is of couise also no coincidence that Thiel (like Kien) maiiies in oidei
to get a good mothei and ieceives something quite undesiiable into the
baigain: Without iealizing it, he had, howevei, accepted thiee things in
his wife: a haish, tyiannical tempei, tiuculence, and a biutal tempeiament.
Aftei six months it was common knowledge who iuled the ioost. One pitied
the stationmastei.
31
The sympathies of the villageis foi Thiel, as opposed
to Lene, whom they biand a whoie (das Mensch) and an animal (Sc ein
Tier), coiiespond to those of the implied ieadei. Thiel is the beloved com-
panion of the village childien, theii infoimal teachei and fiiend, while Lene
is the gieedy wifewhocannot sleepfoi hei excitement about the potatopatch
to be planted on the iailioad iight of way. In contiast to Thiels gentle in-
stiuctiongiven, not coincidentally, in a iich bucolic setting meant to con-
tiast with the new industiial landscapeLenes pedagogy consists of ciuel
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : ,,
coipoieal punishment, the tiaces of which Thiel obseives in the ied maik-
ings on the face of his son Tobias. Lene, too, is the seat of sexuality, and as
such she paialyzes pooi Thiel. This sexual dependency seems to explain his
visceial attachment to hei even aftei he has witnessed hei physical abuse of
Tobias. All in all, one can safely aigue that the novella advances Lene, the
monstious wife andiepiesentative of a natuialistic andbiutal ieality, quite
without iiony. But this only woiks as long as the othei teim in the gendei
binaiynamely Thielis diawn with ielative sympathy.
Canettis citation of Lene in the guie of Theiese diaws out the phony
piemise in such gendei dichotomies. By making Kien (and otheis) equally
monstious, he lays baie the absuidity of heaping the evils (oi iealities) of
the age at the feet of woman. Reieading Lene in light of Theiese allows us to
see howthe foimei is set up to take the fall: like the Fischeiin and Anna, Lene
is doomed fiomthe stait. In hei veiy constiuctionthat is, as she enteis the
naiiativewe nd a ciass distiibution of chaiactei tiaits designed to put a
female face on the staik iealities of the day.
In Autc-da-Fe such a possibility is piecluded fiom the stait. Kien is no
sympathetic oi innocent guie, such as Thiel has often been constiued to be.
Theieses sexuality is even moie pionounced than Lenes, but the simplistic
model of sexual stimulus (woman)[iesponse (man) is inAutc-da-Fe dia-
matically alteied by an aiiay of sexual pioclivities and peiveisions: Pfas
biutal incest, Kiens fiigidity, Geoigs agiant seduction of his patients, and
so on. The citation of Lene in the guie of Theiese seives to iecall and ex-
plode a simplistic gendeied economy of vices and viitues, though it is suiely
also tiue that this iejection of the Thiel[Lene model aiises fiom the laigei
cast of chaiacteis, which will be exploied in gieatei detail below. It is notable
that a numbei of ciitics have only iealized half of the inteitextual potential:
Theieses entiance has sometimes unpioblematically been hailed as the in-
tiusionof the woild into the iealmof Kiens iaieedintellect.
32
Yet nothing
could be moie appalling to the aich anti-iealist Canetti than the piospect of
any one guiemale oi femaleiepiesenting adequately so much ieality.
In aiguing that Canetti is citing Hauptmanns Lene in the guie of The-
iese, I amsuggesting a iathei specic allusion. CanTheiese, then, still be said
to iepiesent a type: In so fai as Lene heiself is diawn as a nonindividual type,
the answei is an emphatic yes. It is not meiely that Lene is given no psycho-
logical depth and consideiably less attention than Thiel, which qualies hei
foi the status of the typical iathei than the individual. It is also the naiia-
,8 : mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i
tois use of the ancient aiachnid tiope to designate hei femininity. In fact,
one of the piincipal images which foi the ieadei aligns the ominous tiain
with the biutal wife is that of the ensnaiing, piedatoiy spidei. Lenes pio-
nounced physicality and sexuality spieads a web of iion ovei the tiapped
husband: Hei full, half-naked bieasts heaved with excitement and thieat-
ened to buist hei biassieie, and hei gatheied skiit made hei bioad hips
appeai even bioadei. This woman appeaied to emanate a poweiuncon-
queiable, inescapableto which Thiel felt unequal. Light as a ne spideis
web and yet im as a net of iion, it suiiounded him, binding, oveiwhelm-
ing, debilitating.
33
The ensuing desciiption of telegiaph wiies and poles as
the web of a gigantic spidei
34
that iuns along the tiain tiacks only undei-
scoies the texts juxtaposition of Lene and the tiain as ambivalent foices of
modein life, both intimately involved in the demise of Tobias.
By paitaking in the tiaditional allegoiization of woman as spidei (and
the implied coiollaiy of man as tiapped victim in hei web), the naiiatoi
of Hauptmanns novella places Lene in a veneiated tiadition of misogynis-
tic iepiesentation in Geiman liteiatuie. The most obvious piedecessoi in
the Geiman canon would of couise be Gotthelf s Die schwarze Spinne (The
Black Spidei, I8:), a stoiy Canetti iead as a youth and iecounts in some
detail in his autobiogiaphy.
35
Though theie aie suiely notable dieiences in
the iealizations of the aiachnid tiopeHauptmann makes Lene moie the
Natuialists stimulus of instinct than the Gotthelan seducei to moial evil
all iepiesentations of this type suggest a ciudely dichotomized distiibution
of chaiactei tiaits invaiiably unfavoiable to the woman.
36
Like Lene, Theiese is constiucted as an unlikely, obese femme fatale.
Theieses physicality, foi example hei goigeous hips ( prachtvclle Huften)
noted by the fuinituie salesman Heii Giob, along with the voluminous blue
skiit, ieceive iepeated attention. Fuitheimoie, hei wedding night expecta-
tions, the ielentless puisuit of Heii Giob, as well as hei appaiently willing
acquiescence in Pfas advances, all attest to an unabashed sexual appetite.
But the type stops heie, at least as fai as the naiiatoi is conceined. Kien,
as we have alieady seen, is in no way poitiayed as the passive victim of the
womans web of intiigue. Tiue, Theiese is called a spidei (as well as Medusa
and a good many othei things), but this is all Kiens doing: In the spidei,
the most ciuel and ugly of all cieatuies, I see an embodiment of woman.
Hei web shimmeis in the sunlight, poisonous and blue.
37
Whethei we look,
then, at the specic gendei economy of Hauptmanns novella oi considei
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : ,,
Lene as a iepiesentative of a bioadei type, it seems iathei cleai that Canettis
inteiest in the allusion is to subveit the tiaditional binaiy gendei classi-
cation. Foi wheieas it was the omniscient naiiatoi of Hauptmanns novella
who advanced the aiachnid link between Lene and the killei tiain, it is the
veiy questionable Kien in Autc-da-Fe who pathetically employs his ihetoii-
cal skills to paint himself as the tiue victimof the monstious housekeepei.
Theiese distinguishes heiself fiom the Fischeiin and Anna in hei ability
to manipulate images and inteivene on hei own behalf. She iejects Kiens
intended iole foi hei as the eteinal mothei, she makes a pass at Heii Giob,
and she meets hei match in Pfa. It is not that she is bettei oi woise than hei
moie simply diawn sistei types, but that, beyond the alieady ciicumsciibed
iole given at the level of naiiatoi, she is able to contest fuithei ieductions in
hei iole that aie assigned (oi denied) hei at the level of chaiactei. This act
of contestation (modest though it is, since it still opeiates well within the
mothei[whoie dichotomy) intioduces to the novel the moie nuancednotion
of gendei as an imputed, but by no means natuial iole. Theieses achieve-
ment, if we can call it that, is to place the gendei steieotype into question by
ieveising the expectations Kien haiboied foi hei. Kien, too, seems to iealize
that the feminine need not iefei to women pei se. In a mannei consonant
with the paiodistic cast of the novel as a whole, Kien untetheis the concept
of gendei fiom its biological mooiings. How else could he discovei that his
biothei, deep down, is ieally a woman: The iepiesentation of the feminine
whethei oi not female guies aie at issuecompiises an impoitant stiand
of naiiative in Autc-da-Fe.
Befoie tuining to the novels tieatment of this moie elusive topic, let us
take stock of the giound coveied so fai. In the Fischeiin we saw how the
notion of woman as pieoidained piize oi ciown foi the male piotagonists
successful completion of a test of matuiity (the Papagena function) is self-
consciously inveited in Fischeiles iejection of his female counteipait pie-
cisely because she is made to appeai as his unacceptably Jewish double. In
the guie of Anna we witnessed the shoitcomings of iomanticized illusions
and passive fantasies in the face of actual abuse: no piince comes to the ies-
cue of this incestuous iuleis daughtei. Finally, in Theiese we aie invited by
allusion to the Lene-Thiel model to iethink the gendeied binaiy distiibu-
tion of vices, and to question the validity of explaining the biutal side of
modeinity as, essentially, female monstiosity. Which is anothei way of say-
ing that Kiens diagnosis of his own sense of exile in the modein woild
oo : mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i
a piedicament faced by so many othei intellectuals of the Weimai eiais
fiankly untenable. Canetti suggests that none of these outwoin liteiaiy topoi
is adequate to captuie the complexity of postWoild Wai I society.
The Biotheis Kien Discovei the Feminine
The male chaiacteis own misogyny is detectable almost without analy-
sis, the only hesitation one might piovisionally have would be the attiibu-
tion of any paiticulai misogynistic obseivation to an unambiguous souice,
as we noted above in suiveying the novels peculiai naiiative situation. This
obvious foimof misogynistic iepiesentation and behavioibe it Kiens in-
spiied pseudophilosophical giounding of misogyny, Pfa as incestuous
fathei and wife-beatei, Fischeile as pimp, oi even Geoigs moie insidious
abusesneed not detain us heie. Foi, to boiiowJustice Pottei Stewaits dic-
tumon poinogiaphy, we knowit when we see it.
38
What is peihaps less cleai
is that notions of the feminine constiucted and employed by each of these
guies aie by no means limited to biological women. Such iepiesentations
iange fiom China, to the novels quixotic goiilla man, indeed, as we have
seen, to the male piotagonist(s) themselves. To undeistand the function of
the feminine on this leveland to appieciate Canettis ciitical engagement
with contempoianeous intellectual debatesit will be necessaiy to digiess
a bit and sketch in the ciisis of subjectivity in n-de-sicle Austiia.
In The New Psychologies, the ist chaptei of The Vanishing Subject,
Judith Ryan outlines the majoi guies in the pie- and non-Fieudian psycho-
logical movements of the late nineteenth and eaily twentieth centuiies:
Fianz Bientano, Einst Mach, William James.
39
The ciisis of subjectivity that
followed fiom the new neoempiiicist views of the selffoi example, fiom
Machs conception of the self as a bundle of sensationspioved discon-
ceiting, to say the least. Ryan explains: As empiiicist thought began incieas-
ingly to ltei into the consciousness of the educated public, panic began to
spiead. If theie was no such thing as the self, the basis foi decisions and ac-
tions seemed to have been iemoved. If theie was no ieal distinction between
subject and object, the familiai stiuctuies of language seemed to have been
eioded. Many contempoiaiies felt viitually paialyzed, unable eithei to act
oi to speak.
40
Ryans suivey of psychologies coveis the peiiod fiom I8,o to
I,_o (though foi the liteiatuie undei consideiation she extends this peiiod
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : oI
to I,o), thus Canetti cleaily comes in at the tail end of this movement.
In his Vienna and the }ews, :8o,:;,8, Steven Bellei concuis in the uigency
of this Weimai-eia debate, pointing out that this question occupied lead-
ing Jewish intellectuals such as Fieud, Schnitzlei, Bioch, and otheis, who
addiessed this disconceiting iift between the empiiical (Machian) disuni-
ed self and the ethical self piesupposed by libeial political cultuie in a
vaiiety of ciucial ways.
41
Canettis contiibution to this debate is manifold,
but ist and foiemost was his iealization that the ciisis was not of subjec-
tivity pei se, but of male subjectivity. Autc-da-Fe, I will aigue, thematizes the
suspect conjunction of iabid misogyny with attempts to shoie up the dis-
solving self.
42
When one thinks of these two pioblemsthe vanishing self
along with misogynyin the eaily twentieth centuiy with special attention
to the Austiian context, it becomes cleai that Canetti was not, by fai, the ist
to tieat these two issues in tandem. His piedecessoi was of couise the widely
iead Otto Weiningei, whose immensely populai Geschlecht und Character
was alieady beyond its thiitieth piinting by the time Canetti sat down to
wiite his novel.
43
Intellectually and cultuially, this is undoubtedly the novels
gieat inteitext, one with which Canetti and his fiiends weie well acquainted.
What Weiningei is essentially doing, Bellei explains, is using sexual types
to desciibe psychological states, a pioceduie that was deeply embedded
in Westein cultuie . . . and] pait of a tiadition that ieached its apogee
in Jungian psychology.
44
Weiningeis legendaiy misogynyhis obsessive
identication of all that he feais with the feminine
45
is integial to his at-
tempt to salvage the self (as the genius, value legislating Man) and ban-
ish those tiaits associated with its dissolution to the categoiy Woman.
46
Wheieas Weiningei sought to salvage the libeial selfa self dened by
ieason and ethical thinkingby iecouise to misogyny (as well, of couise, as
anti-Semitism), Canettis pioject is to expose this putative solution as highly
pioblematic.
Viewing the feminine in this laigei sense helps us to see the male chai-
acteisespecially Kien and Geoigas having moie in common than has
usually been seen. Kien has been tieated as the ascetic academic, who stands
in contiast to his lecheious and hedonistic biothei, Geoig. Ceitainly the
novel itself invites such a polaiization on one level: Kien is iepiesented as
the self heimetically (that is to say academically) sealed o fiom the thieat-
ening stimuli of the outside woild. Geoig, in contiast, is the winsome man
of the woild, who willingly engages, even incoipoiates, the most abeiiant of
o: : mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i
human behavioi in his woik with the insane. This opposition, howevei, is
undeicut in a numbei of ways, but most obviously by the mannei in which
both make use of the feminine. Simply put: both biotheis iepiesent the self
in ciisis, only the method of self-iescue is supeicially dieient. Foi Kien
it is a iadical elimination of the feminine, foi Geoig it is the iadical incoi-
poiation of the veiy samea stiategy he thinks will woik like a pieventive
inoculation against disease.
Kiens academic puisuits aie not incidentally misogynistic, they aie in-
tiinsically so. Canettis decision to make Kien a mastei philologist in the
nineteenth centuiy tiadition fiames the issue in teims of inteipietation.
Kienhimself sees the mattei of inteipieting texts ina faiily simplistic, though
no less self-contiadictoiy, mannei: all semiotic powei emanates fiom the
mastei inteipietei who xes foi all time a heietofoie incomplete oi coiiupt
text. Let us not foiget that this is the man who plans a nal, and, needless
to say, iiiefutable, exegesis of the New Testament, in which he pioposes to
demonstiate that Jesus was at heait a bibliophile like Kien himself: Since
the philologist in himstill lived, he decided to devote himself, when peaceful
times should again bless the land, to a fundamentally new textual exami-
nation of the gospels . . . He felt himself equipped with enough knowledge
to guide Chiistianity back to its tiue souices, and though he was not to be
the ist to poui the tiue woids of the Savioi out to humanity, . . . he might
indeed hope, with sucient innei conviction, that the inteipietations he set
down would be nal.
47
Kiens inteipietive audacity stands in staik inveise
piopoition to the ciedibility he aiouses in the ieadei: because his claims to
authoiity often iefei to well known extiactional texts (such as in this case
the Bible) of which the ieadei has independent knowledge, Kiens pieten-
sion to denitive accuiacy is immediately iecognized as meie bombast. Yet
as long as Kiens poweis of inteipietation aie tiained exclusively upon ab-
stiuse Oiiental texts, and as long as no one can challenge his claim to the
title of the woilds foiemost sinologist, he meets with little opposition.
Like the Philosophie dei Blindheit (philosophy of blindness) he concocts
when confionted with Theieses intiansigent bedioom set, Kiens intellec-
tual conceptions aie eclectic, inconsistent, and fundamentally self-seiving.
Though Kiens ielationships with meie moitals aie at best secondaiy to his
intellectual puisuits, he cleaily tiies to employ the same piocess in iead-
ing people: a unilateial, authoiitaiian piojection of himself onto the othei.
Though small-minded piojection is widespiead in the novel, one can safely
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : o_
aigue that foi Kien woman isoi should bethe philologists text pai ex-
cellence. The equation in fact ieads both ways: it is both a mattei of the
feminization of the text and a textualization of woman.
If Kien is on the one hand full of oveiweening condence in his intei-
pietive aptitude (Whatevei he sets his hand to succeeds, submits to his
pioofs),
48
he is also plagued by lingeiing doubt. In fact, his oveily con-
dent asseitions of demonstiable univocal textual meaningas opposed
to Saussuiian multivalenceieveal an untenable epistemological despeia-
tion. Unconvincingly, but no less hilaiiously, Kien pionounces: Knowledge
has fieed us fiom supeistitions and beliefs. Knowledge makes use always
of the same names, piefeiably Giaeco-Latin, and indicates by these names
actual things. Misundeistandings aie impossible.
49
In addition to the hu-
moi this iemaik aiouses amidst the plethoia of patent misundeistandings,
it bespeaks a peivasive epistemological anxiety.
Eailiei yet Kien ieveals a haiiline ciack in his self-image as mastei
meaning-makei when, following the gieat dispute with Theiese concein-
ing the will, he nds himself stymied and capable only of incompiehensible
diivel: Time and again he had to foice himself to ieach foi the Japanese
manusciipts on his desk. When he got so fai, he would touch them, and im-
mediately, as if iepelled, diaw his hand back again. What is the meaning of
them: . . . On the half-wiitten sheet befoie himhe had diawn, quite contiaiy
to his habit, chaiacteis which had no meaning whatevei.
50
It is of couise no
coincidence that womanheie in the guie of the novels piincipal woman,
Theieseiepiesents the challenge to xable, stable meaning, even while she
iepiesents the fantasy text that elicits the veiy piowess boasted by the phi-
lologist. Indeed these aie two sides of the same coin. The exact same oppo-
sitional ielationshipthough heie the tables aie tuinedis evident in the
situation below wheie Kien is enjoying a tempoiaiy victoiy ovei Theiese:
It was enough foi himthat she was silent. Poised between China and Japan,
he paused to assuie himself that this was the outcome of his clevei diplo-
macy . . . In these days he was feitile in happy conjectuies. An unspeakably
coiiupt text he had iehabilitated within thiee houis. The iight chaiacteis
simply stieamed fiomhis pen . . . Woid by woid, oldei litanies came back to
him and he foigot heis.
51
Theiese is an aiont to scholaiship, theiefoie,
not meiely in the mundane sense of pesteiing the gieat scholai engaged in
his lofty mission of enlightenment (aufklarende Missicn)
52
with petty ma-
teiial iequests, though this is the way Kien peiceives it much of the time. In
o : mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i
hei nagging insciutability, she iepiesents, moie impoitantly, the daik side
of Vissenschaft, and as such she is a constant thieat to Kiens veiy raiscn
detre.
Kien has been attempting, with evei dwindling success, to iead Theiese
since the beginning of the novel. Just befoie pioposing maiiiage, Kien,
thinking he is about to maiiy a mateinal libiaiian, ieects: She is the
heaven-sent instiument foi pieseiving my libiaiy . . . Had I constiucted a
human being accoiding to my own designs, the iesult could not have been
moie apt foi the puipose.
53
What he fails to see, howevei, is that he has all
along been attempting to constiuct hei accoiding to his own design. Both
the desiie to iendei Theiese a patently decipheiable text and the inability
to do so aie evident in the scene wheie Kien lies in bed iecoveiing fiom the
sound beating Theiese has just given him: At that time she iepeated heiself
ovei and ovei again, he leaint hei woids by heait and was thus, in the tiuest
sense, hei mastei . . . but Theiese suddenly began to talk again. What she
said was incompiehensible, and theiefoie held despotic sway ovei him. It
could not be leaint by heait, and who could guess what would come next:
54
None of this dissuades Kien fiom his eoit to textualize Theiese: in fact
his eoits to wiite hei o, oi out of the scene, foim the cential event of
the novel. In what is deseivedly the most celebiated chaptei of the novel,
Piivate Piopeity (Privateigentum), Kien mounts his lengthy Defense of
Leaining, in which he hopes to piove that Theieses death was essential
da Therese zugrunde gehen mute.
55
His self-defense is seless and noble,
foi his is ieally a Verteidigung fur die Vissenschaftthat is, foi science
and tiuth against this female adveisaiy. Theiese, of couise, is fai fiom dead,
and is all the while standing behind hei would-be muideiei. Although we
will want, below, to considei piecisely how and why scholaiship itself de-
manded hei death, what conceins us heie is Kiens chaiacteiistic conception
of Theiesefoi him, now, a meie miiageas a coiiupt text awaiting his
inteipietive genius. The equation of woman with text, and the view of both
as eminently conqueiable, is evident thioughout Kiens thinking, but pei-
haps nowheie so obvious as in the following: He would examine this miiage
until he had convinced himself of what it ieally was. He had followed tiails
no less dangeious, impeifect texts, missing lines. He could not iecall evei
having failed. No pioblem he had undeitaken had evei been left unsolved.
Even this muidei he must needs iegaid as a task accomplished. It took moie
than a hallucination to shattei Kien.
56
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : o,
Kiens failuie to biing Theiese undei semiotic contiol is deeply impli-
cated in his nal suicide. Veiy neai to his demise, Kien extols the viitues of
books ovei people: Books aie dumb, they speak yet they aie dumb, that
is the wondei.
57
Theiese pioves less tiactable than Oiiental manusciipts:
she talks back, thwaiting the unilateial diiection of meaning-making envi-
sioned by Kien. The obstacle to the mastei-slave (philologist-text) model,
which Theiese poses in hei unpiedictable, incompiehensible, and theiefoie
uncontiollable piattle is in fact veiy much like the iebellion of the books
in the nal conagiation scene. Those foimeily docile, decodable cipheis
mount a semiotic insuiiection.
Heie Kiens woild tuins upside down. The passive iecipient of meaning,
the text, takes on a life of its own, wieaking vengeance on the once tyianni-
cal and now quite mad mastei ieadei: A lettei detaches itself fiom the ist
line and hits him a blow on the eai. Letteis aie lead. It huits. Stiike him!
Stiike him! Anothei. And anothei. A footnote kicks him. Moie and moie.
He totteis. Lines and whole pages come clatteiing on to him. They shake and
beat him, they woiiy him, they toss him about among themselves. Blood
. . . Help! Help! Geoig!
58
Kien is ultimately undeimined by the feminine,
beaten now not by Theiese but by the binaiy iigidity of an epistemological
system that seeks to soit out the knowei and the known along piedictable
gendei lines, a system that in the case of Petei Kien self-destiucts. A gieat
libiaiy buins and it is a giand faiewell not to a collection of iiieplaceably
iaie books, but to a system of thought piegnant with its own destiuction.
Focusing on the peison of Kienwho is intentionally diawn iathei
spaiselycan distiact us fiom the novels moie piofound ciitique of con-
tempoiaiy cultuie. In hei most iecent study, Lustmcrd. Sexual Murder in
Veimar Germany, Maiia Tatai iemaiks, The piofusion of images of Eve,
Ciice, Medusa, Judith, and Salome in ait and liteiatuie aiound I,oo gives
vivid testimony to an unpiecedented diead of female sexuality and its homi-
cidal powei.
59
This concatenation biings to mind Kiens own subsequent
diedging of the mythological, liteiaiy, and philosophical canon meant to
make his nal case against Woman.
Kiens gieat speech at the police station, the novels most hilaiious scene,
is of couise deliveied foi a ciime he nevei committed, but aidently wishes he
had: the muidei of Theiese. He cleaily piesents it as a muidei, but is it in any
sense Lustmcrd? Theie can be no doubt that the aggiession between Theiese
and Kien dates fiom the unconsummated wedding night, when Kien, in ie-
oo : mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i
sponse to his biides sexual oveituies, locks himself in the bathioom and
sobs uncontiollably. Ceitainly Kiens physical tiouncing at the hands of this
phallic mothei (as Foell dubs hei) comes as a diiect iesponse to his failuie
to followup on the sexual advances Theiese peiceived himto have initiated.
If the sexual souice of this muideious aggiession is not yet suciently evi-
dent, Canetti piovides a gloss in the foimof the piotagonists ashback. Just
as Kiens wedding night anxieties come to a head, oui woild famous sinolo-
gist iecalls in vivid detail a childhood visit to the beach duiing which his
cuiiosity about the soft, slimy inside of a mussel diives him to uttei distiac-
tion. His fienzieddestiuctionof the sea shell (die Muschel )whenhe can-
not piopeily piy it open, he simply smashes it to smitheieensis as much
an act of Lustmcrd as Doblins Muidei of a Butteicup (Die Ermcrdung
einer Butterblume, I,I_) which Canetti may in fact have had in mind.
60
At
any iate, the incident gains signicance in the novel in so fai as it is elevated
to a chaptei title in Book I. Canetti is cleaily capitalizing upon populaiized
Fieudian ideas in this passage, but as we shall see below in chaptei o, this
tongue-in-cheek boiiowing does not imply an endoisement of Fieud.
Kiens stiikingly leained justication of this imagined muidei piovides
aniionic case studyof the phenomenonTatai nds sostiiking inWeimai-eia
cultuie: not so much the histoiical cases of Lustmoid themselves (numei-
ous enough, to be suie), but the widei, postWoild Wai I cultuial tendency
to ieduce complex sociohistoiical causality to aichaic misogynistic myth.
In Autc-da-Fe we catch Kien in the act: the iumois of Theieses death have
been not only gieatly exaggeiated, but fabiicated befoie oui veiy eyes. Kiens
feeble attempts to coopt victimstatus, simultaneously to suppiess the female
victim, and to obscuie the fact of his own agencyall tiaits Tatai identi-
es as seminal aspects of the Lustmoid phenomenon
61
aie the taiget of
the novels ciitical humoi. Cleaily we aie not in dangei of falling undei the
ideological sway of a man who claims, almost in the same bieath, (I) to have
muideied Theiese in self-defense, (:) that Theiese actually killed heiself in
a giotesque act of autocannibalism, and (_) that it was nally scholaiship
itself which iequiied hei deathall, of couise, while Theiese is physically
pushing heiself on hei confessed muideiei.
If Kiens fiustiated Lustmoid is iooted in a ciisis of male subjectivity,
which, accoiding to Tatai, intensied diamatically in the postWoild Wai I
eia,
62
he nds plenty of cultuial foddei foi his hatied in the books he ieads
and collects. In the end of his gieat defense, Kien ciedits his libiaiy with
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : o,
Theieses muidei. Similaily, Pfa seeks to dismiss Kiens iantei by explain-
ing to the detectives that things like that aie in books.
63
And both aie, in
a sense, quite iight.
As if to beai out the veiacity of Pfas claim, Kien mounts in the novels
penultimate chaptei, not coincidentally entitled Waiywise Odysseus (List-
enreicher Odysseus), a veiitable toui de foice, ostensibly foi the benet of
his biothei Geoig, pioving the iich cultuial pedigiee of misogyny. Begin-
ning with Confucius, Buddha, and Homei, Kien wends his way thiough the
gieat books taking (and mistaking) misogyny wheievei he can nd it. At one
point duiing this woman-hating haiangue, the oveicondent psychiatiist
thinks he has found the key to Kiens disquisition: Geoig heie saw him-
self as an impoitant pait of the mechanism which anothei peison had set in
motion foi the maintenance of his thieatened self-iespect.
64
While Geoig
coiiectly peiceives Kiens thieatened sense of self as a key piecondition foi
this cultuied exhibition of misogyny, this is piobably no longei the insight
we need. What stiikes the ieadei at this point is not Kiens quiiky peiveision
of texts, but the laige-scale cultuial availabilityof misogynist naiiatives. Un-
like modeinist novels such as Doblins Berlin Alexanderplatz, which employ
misogynist myth to exculpate the Lustmcrder (sexual muideieis),
65
Autc-da-
Fe foiegiounds the cultuial excess of such myth and showcases the piotago-
nists eoits at self-exoneiation in the pathetic and despeiate guie of Petei
Kien, that impotent would-be Lustmoidei. What kind of man would not
have muideied such a woman: he asks, ihetoiically.
66
As Kien biings his
cultuied tiiade to a close, Geoig obseives coiiectly, in a statement that ex-
ceeds his own compiehension, that the cultuial] mateiial was moie ample
than his hatied.
67
Madness, as Foucault has taught us, may be moie a suspect catchall desig-
nation that expands and contiacts to meet the inteiests of those in powei
than some eteinal, objectively deteimined classication. Dening madness
can be deployed polemically to maiginalize those who would thieaten the
semiotic and social oidei. This is piecisely the way in which the naiiatoi
casts Kiens diagnosis of Theieses madness: He felt at his best when he
could ielegate hei to the one categoiy wheie theie was ioom foi eveiything
which he was unable, foi all his education and undeistanding, to explain.
Of lunatics he had a ciude and simple idea, he dened them as those who
do the most contiadictoiy things yet have the same woid foi all. Accoid-
o8 : mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i
ing to this denition Theiese wasin contiadiction to himselfdecidedly
mad.
68
The conjunctionof womenandmadness has, of couise, its ownwell-
woin tiadition in Euiopean liteiatuie, as Gilbeit and Gubai have long since
shown.
69
This novels specic feminization of mental illness is caiefully laid
out, paiticulaily with iegaid to the gynecologist-psychiatiist Geoig Kien.
An impoitant thiead iunning thioughout this naiiativization of madness
is the maikedly feminine thieat to stable semiotics, that is, the menace
posed by those who do the most contiadictoiy things yet have the same
woid foi all.
In his iigid insistence on the accepted teiminology of ocial psychia-
tiy and in his conviction that the insane aie only good insofai as they can
be used to coiioboiate the existing scientic system, Geoigs piedecessoi at
the Paiis insane asylum comes veiy close to Kien himself: He took it foi his
ieal woik in life, to use the vast mateiial at his disposal to suppoit the ac-
cepted teiminology . . . He clung to the infallibility of the system and hated
doubteis. Human beings, especially neive cases and ciiminals, weie noth-
ing to him . . . They piovided expeiiences which authoiities could use to
build up the science. He himself was an authoiity.
70
This egotistical diiec-
toi elaboiates a denition of madness as ludicious as Kiens philosophy of
blindness. Like Kiens own iathei suspect pseudophilosophy, the piedeces-
sois psychiatiic piinciples aie unmistakably iooted in a conict with ieal
women: Madness, he said with gieat emphasis, and looked at his wife with
penetiating and accusing gaze (she blushed), madness is the disease which
attacks those veiy people who think only of themselves. Mental disease is
the punishment of egoism. . . He had nothing else to say to his wife. She was
thiity yeais youngei than he and cast a glowovei the evening of his life. His
ist wife had iun away befoie he could shut hei upas he had done with the
secondin his own institute, she was an incuiable egoist. His thiid, against
whom he had nothing save his own jealousy, loved Geoig Kien.
71
Just as
the quack philologist locates the disiuption of meaning in woman, so too
this self-impoitant psychiatiist nds madness to consist of excessive female
egoism, foi which his ex-wives piovide the piime examples.
Although Geoig would have us believe he is the gieat alteinative to his
piedecessois iigidity and aiiogance, we come to undeistand (as we ieal-
ize the extent to which Geoig has commandeeied the naiiatois voice) how
fundamentally similai they ieally aie. Not unlike his piedecessoi (and not
unlike his eldei biothei) Geoig sees himself as a savioi guie, that his meth-
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : o,
ods diei is not ieally the point. He casts himself (by means of the inltiated
naiiatois voice) ist as an inveited Moses guie, then as Yahweh himself:
He did them the insane] the seivice, and led them back into Egypt. The
ways he had found to do so weie no less wondeiful than those of the Loid
when he set fiee his people.
72
Reminiscent of Kiens cooptation of the nai-
iatoi to expiess his woildwide eminence among sinologists and philologists
is Geoigs claim to his own fame, deceptively ensconced in authoiial naiia-
tion: His colleagues admiied and envied him. . . They hastened to bieak o
little fiagments of his fame, by pioclaiming indebtedness to him and apply-
ing his methods to the most dieient cases. He was bound to get the Nobel
Piize.
73
Geoigs immense ego and putative fame iest no less than his biotheis
on the exploitation of the feminine. But wheieas Kien felt compelled to ex-
clude it in oidei to piotect the puiity of his piecepts and the integiity of
his much vaunted Charakter, Geoigs manipulation takes the foim of iadi-
cal cooptation. This was tiue fiom his eailiest days as a gynecologist when
he exploited his good looks to attiact female patients. In his own woids,
he was suiiounded and spoilt by innumeiable women, all ieady to seive
him, he lived like Piince Gautama befoie he became Buddha.
74
What shall
concein us piesently is piecisely this conveision expeiience in which he ap-
paiently leains to foiego the pleasuies of ieal women, only to take on the
mantle of malleable femininity.
Though he claims to have paited ways with women at age twenty-eight,
we should not undeistand this as total abstention.
75
It is tiue, howevei, that
Geoigs infatuation with the so-called goiilla man (the insane biothei of
the iich bankei) coincides piecisely with his attempt to fend o voluptuous
female sexuality in the peison of the bankeis wife. This eiotically neglected
spouse luies Geoig to the uppei chambeis of hei mansion in oidei to seduce
him by means of a sexually suggestive painting, which, in defeience to ap-
peaiances, had been ielegated to the goiilla mans gaiiet quaiteis. But this
stiategy fails: the extensive oveituies of Madamethe bankeis wife
piove fiuitless against the chaim of the goiilla man: the man who has, in
Geoigs eyes, successfully appiopiiated the feminine while iemaining male.
Foi Geoig it is love at ist sight: If only the goiilla would speak again! Be-
foie this single wish all his thoughts of time-wasting, duties, women, success
had vanished, as if fiom the day of his biith he had only been seeking foi
that man, oi that goiilla, who possessed his own language.
76
,o : mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i
In a study of quite dieient texts (namely, hoiioi lms), Caiol Clovei
has shown that the typical stoiy of male development, deeply entienched in
the Westein tiadition, is maiked by an appiopiiation of cultuially dened
feminine tiaits.
77
Thus, wheieas a woman exhibiting male attiibutes would
moie likely be seen as abeiiant (and thus incite hoiioi), it is entiiely pos-
sible foi a male heiowhile ietaining a fundamentally masculine identity
to exhibit development in his chaiactei by becoming somewhat feminized.
The developmental aic of one male chaiactei (in Autc-da-Fe. Geoig) can be
made to look moie ieasonable, Clovei demonstiates, by contiasting it with a
moie iadically gendei-mixed chaiactei (heie, the goiilla man). In poitiay-
ing Geoigs gieat conveision, this pivotal giowth expeiience made possible
by the incoipoiation of the feminine, Canetti is lampooning this veiy tiadi-
tion. But to undeistand this paiody bettei, we must ist ask what piecisely
this goiilla man iepiesents.
Pait of the humoi, of couise, is the appaient incongiuity of images. We
aie invited to see this bestial man evincing a consideiable sexual appetite
(iecall his evei-piesent scantily diessed Paiisian secietaiy on call to tend
to his eveiy whim) as somehow essentially feminine. But in his piimitive-
ness, animality, and piedilection foi hedonistic pleasuies, he is a quite pie-
cise iealization of Weiningeis feais iegaiding the suiiendei of the mas-
culine bastions of logic and ethics to the feminine iealm of feelings and
sexual desiie, whichhe sawoccuiiing all aioundhimintuin-of-the-centuiy,
modeinist Euiope.
78
Indeed, one could not ask foi a cleaiei illustiation
of a foifeituie of logic and inteisubjective iationality than the goiilla mans
solipsistic system of language.
Geoig falls not foi the sexualized, macho ape-man, but foi his allegedly
ievolutionaiy and whimsical system of language, in which the signieis no
longei match upwith the signieds. In fact, the goiilla mans linguistic inno-
vations, viewed in theii entiiety, can accuiately be seen as a caiicatuie of
Saussuiian insights on the ielationship of langue to parcle. Since the expeii-
ence of the goiilla man is what causes Geoig not only to ieconsidei his pie-
vious piomiscuity, but also to piivilege madness ovei sanity, it will be woith
examining the goiilla mans enteipiise in some detail. This is the linguistic
maivel that so captivates Geoig, not to mention many ciitics of the novel:
Each syllable which he utteied coiiesponded to a special gestuie. The
woids foi objects seemed to change. He meant the pictuie a hundied
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : ,I
times and called it each time something dieient, the names seemed to
depend on the gestuie with which he demonstiated them . . . Objects . . .
had no special names. They weie called accoiding to the mood in which
they oated. Theii faces alteied foi the goiilla, who lived a wild, tense,
stoimy life. His life communicated itself to them, they had an active pait
in it. He had peopled two iooms with a whole woild. He cieated what
he wanted, and aftei the six days of cieation, on the seventh took up his
abode theiein. Instead of iesting, he gave his cieation speech.
79
The fiee-oating signieis notwithstanding, the goiilla man is essentially
a Petei Kien in a monkey suit. The goiillas language pioduction, a giand
spoof on the neoempiiicist theoiies of the day (as we will see in gieatei detail
below in chaptei _), has two essential qualities: (I) it is appaiently capii-
cious, uid, and spontaneous, but (:) anchoied in the consciousness of the
(evei-changing) goiilla man himself. The goiillas speech is indeed an act of
fiee cieation ovei which he himself exeicises sole domain. The uidity and
lack of cleai denition between self and othei that chaiacteiizes this lan-
guage is in fact a paiodistic evocation of Weiningeis infamous shibboleth
of Veiblichkeit, oi femininity, namely the so-called Henide.
80
It may be
a tautology to unveil the goiilla mans language system as puie nonsense,
yet insofai as Geoig himselfwho has been seen by a numbei of ciitics as
the novels only sane chaiactei, even as the voice of Canetti himselfmakes
so much of it, we, too, need to be veiy cleai about it.
Foi Geoig this is a ciucial expeiience: he publishes a foimal thesis on
the speech of this madman
81
and alteis the entiie couise of his life fiom
this point on. Geoigs enthusiasm foi the goiilla mans language is funda-
mentally analogous to the peculiai biand of empathetic psychiatiy he piac-
tices: he tieats his patients by taking on theii manias, by playing a iole in
theii psychodiama, by becoming a puie function of theii needs. He plays
the Fischeiin to theii Fischeile, the Anna to theii Pfa, and, quite liteially,
the Jeanne to theii Jean.
82
In shoit, in both the naiiowei and metaphoiical
senses, he plays the iole of woman. Yet just as the goiillas language capii-
ciously shifts in meaning accoiding to his mood oi passion but nevei spins
out of his contiol, so, too, is Geoig coveitly always in chaige. He plays, but
nevei ieally becomes, the Veib Petei accuses himof having become.
83
The
malleable mask he dons meiely seives to camouage a iathei unied, ego-
dominated, male self.
,: : mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i
His theiapy amounts to playacting, as his eldei biothei iepeatedly
chaiges. Kings he addiessed ieveiently as Youi Majesty . . . He became theii
sole condant . . . He advised them . . . as though theii wishes weie his own,
cautiously keeping theii aims and theii beliefs befoie his eyes . . . nevei au-
thoiitative in his dealings with men . . . Was he not aftei all theii chief min-
istei, theii piophet oi theii apostle, occasionally even theii chambeilain:
84
Caieful to appeai submissive and humble to men, and to fulll theii delu-
sional wishes, Geoig cleaily occupies a feminine iole in the tieatment of
his patients. In one of the novels most memoiable images Geoig envisions
himself as a walking wax tablet (eine spazierende Vachstafel ),
85
which ex-
piesses piecisely his self-conception as passive ieceptacle iathei than domi-
neeiing deteiminei of meaning. On the suiface this would indeed seem to
be quite the opposite of his eldei biotheis self-image, indeed, it tellingly
coincides with the philologists conception of the ideal, masteiable, text.
Geoigs piincipal undoing in the ieadeis eyes is his bungling of the tieat-
ment of his own biothei. Like the ienowned philologist who fails accu-
iately to iead Theiese, the famous psychiatiist uniavels befoie oui eyes as
he makes one idiotic diagnosis aftei anothei. Despite (oi peihaps because
of ) his vaunted ability to assume the manias of otheis, he cannot ieally see
much beyond himself. When he aiiives on the scene and heais Theieses
tale about Kien having muideied a pievious wife, he iefeis the ciisis back to
himself. In the blink of an eye, he shifts oui focus fiom the ailing biothei to
the spectei of a disgiaced, inteinationally ienowned theiapist:
Geoig the biothei of a sexual muideiei eines Lustmcrders]. Headlines in
all the papeis . . . His ietiiement fiom the diiection of the institute. In-
discietion. Divoice. His assistants to succeed him. The patients . . . They
love him, they need him, he cannot leave them. Resignation is impos-
sible. Peteis aaiis must be seen to . . . He was all foi Chinese chaiacteis,
Geoig foi human beings. Petei must be put in a home . . . It is evident that
he is not iesponsible foi his actions. Undei no ciicumstances will Geoig
ietiie fiom the diiection of the institute.
86
In passages such as these it becomes cleai that Geoigs caieful leaining of
the language of the insane is not essentially dieient fiom Kiens motive in
memoiizing Theieses eveiy utteiance. The eect of emphasizing that He
was all foi Chinese chaiacteis, Geoig foi human beings simply encouiages
us in oui ieading of these two phenomena, Oiiental texts and the insane, as
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : ,_
paiallel instances of the feminine, though of couise Geoig means to suggest
the much gieatei impoitance of his endeavoi. Yet it is cleai enough that both
biotheis seek contiol andconimationof theii ownpieeminence andgenius
by exploiting the inteipietive potential of theii speciously feminized objects
of inquiiy. This essential identity of the two biotheis is evident once moie in
Geoigs yeaining foi a place wheie he too was no less absolute mastei than
his biothei in the libiaiy.
87
To sustain this illusion of absolute soveieignty
both employ the veiy clichd, contempoiaiy conceptions of the feminine
that achieved such widespiead notoiiety duiing the inteiwai peiiod. Petei
Kien, in a vain eoit to shoie up an obsolete, positivistic epistemology, tiies
despeiately to textualize his woman, to make hei the unmistakable object
in the subject-object binaiy, and theieby to assuage his own anxieties via
cultuie. When she fails to comply, when the thieat of incompiehensibility
peisists, his system collapses and he goes mad. Geoig attempts to coopt the
feminine as a type of madness and malleability that claims to subveit anossi-
ed, conseivative political cultuie. His endeavoi, no less than his biotheis,
is piincipally one of inteipietation and meaning-making. But the subvei-
sive, counteicultuial, and antibouigeois stance that Geoigs conveision ex-
peiience initially seems to signify is ultimately exposed foi its iootedness
in a piofound egocentiism. Like Kiens, Geoigs use of the feminine pioves
to be a piofoundly unsuccessful way of dening himself. In the end Kien
immolates himself and Geoig depaits, ignoiant of his own disgiace.
This analysis iaises new questions about canonical ieadings of Autc-da-
Fe. Until the seventies it was not uncommon to nd Geoig inteipieted as
the novels only identication guie, even as the authois raiscnneur, an
idea Foell iesuiiects in hei iecent study of I,,. One of the piincipal iea-
sons foi siding with Geoig is of couise his ielative congeniality towaid the
gieedy, self-centeied, and biutal cast of chaiacteis. Moie impoitant to in-
teipieteis such as Waltei H. Sokel, howevei, was the alleged coiiespondence
between Geoigs ieections on ciowds and Canettis own theoiy on this
topic as elaboiated at gieat length in Crcwds and Pcwer.
88
Though moie ie-
cent evaluations of Geoig have taken him down a peg, uncoveiing him foi
the chailatan he is,
89
none has penetiated to the piincipal point of identity
between the biotheis Kien: the exploitation of the feminine to iesolve a male
ego ciisis.
The ieading I have developed heie might also dampen the kind of en-
thusiasm, which, foi example, Russell Beiman expiesses in The Rise cf the
, : mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i
Mcdern German Ncvel (I,8o), wheie he adduces Autc-da-Fe as an instance
of chaiismatic modeinism.
90
This inteipietation hinges on a iathei san-
guine ieading of Geoig, who is poitiayed as the key exponent of the novels
utopianchaiactei. Beimans peispective onGeoig andthe novel as a whole
seems to be iooted in a stiain of liteiaiy theoiy that seesif only im-
plicitlya souice of social libeiation in both the linguistic theoiies of Feidi-
nand de Saussuie and Fieud as he was iead in the late sixties, and beyond.
The libeiation of the signiei fiom the signied as well as a belief in the
emancipatoiy potential of uniepiessed libidinal eneigies have indeed seived
to inspiie the liteiaiy theoiy of leftist ciitics as diveise as Foucault, Cixous,
Baithes, and some membeis of the Fiankfuit School. Saussuiian linguistics,
it would seem, has helped deconstiuct the natuialness not only of language,
but that of laigei social and gendei aiiangements as well.
This linguistic[psychoanalytic infusion into ciiticism, notwithstanding
the many lasting contiibutions it has made and continues to inspiie, may
be piecisely what has blinded us foi so many yeais to Canettis paiody
in the guie of Geoig. Neithei Geoigs enthusiasm foi a language that is
nothing moie than a childs, noi his espousal of ghting insanity with in-
sanity, can ieally be taken seiiously today. His authoiitaiian occupation of
feminine madness is haidly a haibingei of the new chaiismatic commu-
nityunless we ieally want to emulate the goiilla mans semiotic whimsy, to
which, let us not foiget, his sex-slave secietaiy must suboidinate hei eveiy
desiie. Indeed, without the oveiwhelming context of emancipatoiy liteiaiy
and cultuial theoiy that values the maiginal, oppositional foices thought
to stand outside the law (and which Beiman felt weie piesent in Geoig),
it is quite dicult to imagine how one could have been so enthialled with
Geoig. Canettis paiody of Geoigs appiopiiation of the feminine (ist in
the seduction of his gynecological patients, then in his adoption of the lan-
guage of the insane) also gives us ieason to ieevaluate Geoigs iuminations
on the ciowd. Sokel may be quite iight to emphasize some thematic pai-
allels with Crcwds and Pcwer, but with one impoitant caveat: foi the eth-
nologist[sociologist Canetti, die Masse (meaning mass oi ciowd) is
a fundamental categoiy of social analysis applicable to all human beings.
Foi Geoig, it is cleailyand theiefoie speciouslyfeminized.
91
The best
evidence of this may be Geoigs conviction that his own couise of self-
feminization has inuied him to the dangeis of an unannounced eiuption of
the feminine: Countless people go mad because the mass in them is pai-
mi socvv .s c0i10v.i cvi 1i q0i : ,,
ticulaily stiongly developed and can get no satisfaction . . . Once he had
lived foi his piivate tastes, his ambition and women, now his one desiie was
peipetually to lose himself. In this activity he came neaiei to the thoughts
and wishes of the mass, than did those othei isolated individuals aiound
whom he lived.
92
Geoig nevei gives up eithei his own iathei imly devel-
oped sense of individuation noi his lascivious appetites. His newfound love
of the ciowd is just anothei instance of eiotically chaiged playacting. Below
in chaptei ,, within a discussion of the novels iesponse to the contempoiaiy
Fieud mania, we will obseive howGeoigs muddled ideas about societal on-
togeny foima pointed and humoious taiget of satiie. Moie immediately, we
will see how both Geoig and Kien wiap themselves in the iespectable gaib
of Weimai-eia philosophy, a piocess that in the end only demeans the laigei
cultuial pioject to which both pay such eusive lip seivice.
_ Self-Indulgent Philosophies
of the Weimai Peiiod
The Use and Abuse of Neoempiiicism
and Neo-Kantianism
By the time he wiote Autc-da-Fe, Canetti had aiiived at a devastating insight:
not only is all speech self-seiving but all listening is self-seiving. We iemake
the woild in oui minds as a phantasmagoiia of oui desiies.
David Denby
1
With the noted exceptions of the ieveied Di. Sonne and a few othei
elect, Canetti iecalls the bulk of the Viennese intellectuals he encounteied
duiing the inteiwai peiiod as pioblematically self-absoibed: One has to
imagine this city and this coeehouse ethos, this ood of self-iefeience, self-
asseition, confession and self-aggiandizing. Eveiyone spilled ovei with sym-
pathy foi himself and foi his own signicance. Eveiyone giumbled, eveiy-
one chimed in and tiumpeted. Yet all iemained huddled togethei in small
gioups, even publicly, because they needed and sueied each othei foi theii
self-impoitant] speeches.
2
Paiticulaily this nal sentence, which poitiays
these gatheiings not as beaiing intiinsic communal value, but useful instead
only insofai as they piop up the solipsistic individual, iesonates piofoundly
and hilaiiously in Autc-da-Fe. It is piecisely this selshness (Eigenutz), the
polai opposite of eveiything Sonne (and, by extension, Canetti) stands foi,
that Canetti saw as the expiession of a dangeious and widespiead lack of
concein foi society. Canetti singles out Eastein philosophyoi, to be moie
piecise, a paiticulai mode of ieceptionof Easteinthoughtas the culpiit foi
this asocial behavioi on the pait of so many intellectuals of this eia. Eastein
wisdom, he contends, piovided a populai and iespectable way of abandon-
ing social iesponsibility: In ienouncing sympathy foi the woild of ones
immediate enviions, one also suiiendeied iesponsibility foi it.
3
But in Autc-da-Fe it is not ieally Eastein philosophydespite oui pio-
ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm : ,,
tagonists piominence as a woild-ienowned sinologist
4
that seives as in-
tellectual covei foi a ietieat fiom social conceins, but iathei two specic
philosophical movements that ouiished in the inteiwai peiiod: neoempiii-
cism, which in the novel is associated piincipally with Geoig, and a loosely
piacticed neoidealism, which of couise centeis on Kien himself. These two
highly educated biotheis both wiap themselves in populai (and populai-
ized) philosophy in oidei to authoiize theii spuiious withdiawal fiom an
incieasingly bewildeiing social ieality. Contiaiy to what Lukcs would latei
claim about modeinismthat it abuses the dignity of philosophy to en-
doise its own subjectivist ideologyAutc-da-Fe pointedly questions the use
of philosophy employed to legitimize the denigiation of social awaieness.
Moieovei, Kien and Geoig iepiesent two sides of the same philosophical
coin. Both the iadicalization of the Idealist subject (as caiicatuied in Kien)
as well as the empiiicist piemise of inductive epistemology (as piacticed
by Geoig) tend to giant piioiity to the thinking[peicipient subject at the
expense of those objects of thought and sensation. In the end, these self-
legislating subjects gieatly exceed Kants piesciiption foi autonomy, they
pioceed unhindeied in theii abusive and solipsistic behavioi by viitually
any kind of checks and balances and, woise yet, do so as adheients of high-
minded philosophical schools.
Befoie puisuing this line of thought, a woid on method. Pievious ciitical
discussion of philosophy in Autc-da-Fe has focused on classical empiiicism,
taking its cue fiom the piotagonist himself, who, in a moment of philo-
sophical confusion, quotes the famous eighteenth centuiy Biitish empiiicist
Bishop Beikeley.
5
While Daibys discussion of Kiens misappiopiiation of
Beikeley iemains instiuctive, it may also be misleading insofai as it takes the
novel foi an academic philosophical tiactate. Theie aie two pioblems with
this assumption. Fiist, Canetti iepeatedly discounted this intention, piotest-
ing that he was not in the ist place a philosophei. Though he exhibits an
impiessive but geneial familiaiity with the Westein philosophical tiadition,
one that could be assumed in an educated peison of his day, he neveitheless
yielded on paiticulai points to the philosophically moie expeit Heimann
Bioch, who, accoiding to Canetti, gave himself ovei to philosophy as will-
ingly as otheis yielded to noctuinal pleasuies.
6
One can fuitheimoie deduce
fiom Canettis total oeuvie that Canetti was indeed well acquainted with
those aieas of philosophy that impinged upon the social conceins deaiest
to him, that is, issues ielated to ciowds and powei. Of couise we should not
,8 : ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm
noweii in the opposite extieme by assuming that the numeious philosophi-
cal iefeiences in Autc-da-Fe aie supeiuous oi meie backgiound music, as
they suiely aie, foi example, in Isaac Bashevis Singeis novel Shcsha. On the
contiaiy, theycontinue to be quite meaningful, as we shall see below, though
not as inteiventions in piofessional academic philosophy, but iathei insofai
as they illuminate the individuals ielationship to society and cultuie as a
whole. Second, the fact that neoempiiicism and neo-Kantianism make theii
appeaiance by way of caiicatuie suggests that we will be bettei seived by
seeking theii meaning bioadly, that is, in the mannei in which they seive
to chaiacteiize the iespective guie, iathei than as an independently valid
assessment of the iespective philosophical movement. Finally, in this ie-
gaid we should note that Canetti simply did not know diiectly the woik of
Fianz Bientano, a majoi guie in neoempiiicism, at the time he wiote the
novel.
7
The novel cannot theiefoie be iead as an academic, souice-based en-
gagement with thisoi, indeed, any paiticulaiphilosophical school. In
elaboiately ieconstiucting a philosophical system of, say, Bishop Beikeley
in oidei to elucidate a quip that Kien tosses o oppoitunistically, one cleaily
iisks heimeneutic oveikill. Oi woise, it can lead us away fiom the novels
piincipal conceins, and, howevei inadveitently, piesent a kind of evasion of
the novels cential ciitique. Instead, I will pioceed on the assumption that
Canetti imbibed neoempiiicism as something that was, as he himself puts it
in a piece of coiiespondence, simply in the aii.
8
Empiiicism and Neoempiiicism
Judith Ryan has shown that, with psychology just beginning to emeige
fiomphilosophy as a discipline in its own iight, empiiicist psychology was
the gieat and as yet neglected impetus foi modeinist wiiteis up to I,o.
9
Let us begin by asking how Canettis novel of I,_o_I ts into this matiix of
ideas.
Ryan sets out to distinguish between the expeiimental psychologists
and the empiiicists of the lattei half of the nineteenth centuiy.
10
The
foimei, iepiesented by Wilhelm Wundt, inquiied into human sensation by
means of expeiimentation and oveilapped with the inteiests of physics, such
inquiiies led to newinvestigations into the vaiious foims of illusion peipe-
tiated by the senses.
11
By contiast, the empiiicists (and in paiticulai Bien-
ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm : ,,
tano) piized intiospection ovei expeiimentation. It is this second gioup,
the philosophei-psychologists, the empiiicists, that Ryan ciedits with the
gieatest impact on wiiteis and aitists at the tuin of the centuiy.
12
Heie
is Ryans picis of the ideas that weie to piove so inuential on modeinist
poets: What did it mean to be an empiiicist in the late nineteenth centuiy:
Piimaiily, it meant that the only admissible evidence foi the existence of
something was that of oui senses, the only ieality was that of oui conscious-
ness. The empiiicists attacked metaphysics as postulating a ieality behind
oi beyond that of the senses. Similaily, they iejected the dualismof subject
and object. Foi them, theie was no sepaiate object-woild: eveiything that
was, subsisted in consciousness itself.
13
The toweiing guies in this gioup weie, as we have alieady noted, the
Austiians Fianz Bientano and Einst Mach, as well as the Ameiican William
James. Although theie aie impoitant dieiences among these thinkeis,
14
the denominatoi common to all is a diluted, less substantial self. Bientano
championed a moie systematized view of the poetic theoiy of coiiespon-
dences, in which neithei the subject noi the object exists absolutely and
independently, but only in mutual inteidependence. This ielationship he
called intentional. Machs famous denition of the peicipient subject as
a mass of sensations, loosely bundled togethei goes a good deal fuithei
in uniaveling the tiaditional conception of the self. And though William
James tempeied the eect of such iadical ideas by means of his philosophy
of piagmatism, he neveitheless shaied such fundamental concepts as the in-
tentionality of peiception. His answei to those who saw empiiicism as a
life-inhibiting philosophy was to piopose a stiategy of accepting any notions
that actually helped us in oui piactical lives, even though they might not
accoid with the moie sophisticated philosophical views we also held.
15
Ryans most impoitant contiibution, foi oui puiposes, conceins the
peivasiveness of empiiicist thinking. She shows, foi example, how Bien-
tanos teaching seeped into the Austiian Gymnasien (univeisity piepaiatoiy
schools) by way of his numeious students who latei took teaching positions
theie. In geneial, it seems well established that empiiicist thinkeis such as
Mach, Bientano, and James did indeed set the intellectual agenda on this
issue at least thiough the eaily decades of the twentieth centuiythat is,
if we aie caieful to include not only theii disciples, but theii opponents as
well. While it is tiue that Canetti latei claimed to have had only an insuf-
cient conception of Bientanos widespiead inuence (die Vielfalt seiner
8o : ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm
Austrahlung) on contempoiaiy thinkeis,
16
he acknowledges that the Vien-
nese aii was still thick with fiee-oating neoempiiicist notions duiing the
inteiwai peiiod.
Though Ryan piesents a quite dieientiated spectium of liteiaiy ie-
sponses to the pioblem of the vanishing subjectsome authois enact the
tiauma, otheis paiody it, still otheis oppose ithei suivey of contempoiaiy
philosophy and psychology pays scant attention to that piominent intellec-
tual movement that eectively (though indiiectly) opposed empiiicist psy-
chology, namely neo-Kantianisma movement that is impoitantly ielevant
to Autc-da-Fe. Nowheie aie these schools moie cleaily opposed than in theii
conception of subjectivity. While the neoempiiicists tiumpeted the eiosion
of the boundaiy betweenself and woild, the neo-Kantians sought to ieestab-
lish the line of demaication sepaiating the Verstandeswelt (woild of intel-
lect) fiom the Sinneswelt (woild of sensoiy expeiience), a division that was
held to be pieiequisite to the expiession of Kantian autonomy of the indi-
vidual. An additional amendment to Ryans account seems in oidei when
appiaising the woik of Canetti, namely a gieatei emphasis on the expeii-
mental psychologists within the neoempiiicist movement as opposed to the
intiospective philosophei-psychologists. We ought to iemembei inthis con-
nection that Canetti spent ve yeais studying chemistiy and allied sciences
just piioi to wiiting Autc-da-Fe. Though he could not ee quickly enough
fiom the laboiatoiy, this expeiience appeais to have left its impiint on the
novel. Indeed we shall see below that a stiiking analogy exists between the
appioach taken by expeiimental psychologists such as WilhelmWundt and
the foim of the novel as designed by Di. iei. nat. Elias Canetti.
The novels attitude towaid empiiicist accounts of subjectivity is, as we
shall see, iichly paiodic. Kien is at best a faii-weathei empiiicist, Geoig a fai-
cical caiicatuie of the empiiical self. Canettis main concein is to show that
the empiiicist conception of the self may be ne foi woild-weaiy aesthetes
and lonely lyiic poets, but is oveitaxed in confionting the demands of intei-
subjectivity, that is to say in imagining humans as essentially social beings.
In diawing out the implications of empiiicist thinking, often by means of
meiciless hypeibole, the novel suggests that this mannei of thinking undei-
mines the sociopolitical iealm. In teims of individual psychology, moieovei,
it implies a kind of self-evisceiation, even a Selbstmcrd. foi only a self can
get iid of a self.
Petei Kien is neithei the isolated individual in the veitiginous metiopolis
ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm : 8I
fumbling to make sense of self and woild (e.g., Rilkes Malte), noi the aitist
as a young man (Musils Toile), noi the hapless young heio foiced to live
out the clichs of a pievious geneiation (Biochs Pasenow). Wiiting in the
wake of iising social uniestwhose violence, as we have noted, Canetti wit-
nessed peisonallyand in the wake of his own expeiience of the isolating
natuie of an oveispecialized academia, Canetti is pieoccupied with the dis-
solution not of the self pei se, but of the connection between the individual
and society. Oi, to put it anothei way, he pioblematizes a conception of the
self, which fiom the outset is unsuited to inteipeisonal and social engage-
ment.
17
His iesponse to the matiix of empiiicist psychology is not, theiefoie,
a sympathetic liteiaiy ieenactment of the vanishing subject, but a ciitique
of inauthentic stiategies of self-asseition, a paiody of illegitimate eoits to
oveicome the subject-object dichotomy and, ultimately, a iejection of em-
piiicist psychology as solipsistic.
Empiiicist as well as expeiimental psychology weie, as we noted, veiy
much conceined with the mattei of peiception. But wheieas empiiicists
such as Bientano (much like his eighteenth-centuiy empiiicist piedeces-
soi Beikeley) stiessed the inteidependence of existence and peiception, the
expeiimental ieseaicheis such as Wundt emphasized the distinctions be-
tween the individuals peiceptions and a scientically obseivable ieality.
Both theoiies have a ceitain validity: the foimei stiesses the symbiotic iela-
tionship, the constitutive powei of peiception (and thus the inextiicability
of ieality and peiception), while the lattei stiesses the distoiting potential
inheient in peiception.
At ist glance, Theieses cieative iewoiking of the sign at the fuinituie
shop seems to give us a scene fiom classical comedy, of which Gottsched
himselfweie it not foi the faicemight heaitily appiove: She came to a
halt in fiont of his shop. The letteis in the shop fiont came close to hei eyes.
Fiist she iead Gioss & Mothei, then Biute & Wife. She liked that. She even
wasted some of hei busy time just looking at it . . . The letteis danced foi
joy, and when they had nished dancing she iead suddenly, Gioss & Wife.
That didnt suit hei at all.
18
The scene is a spoof on Bientanos innei pei-
ception, which giants a ieality to consciousness, whethei oi not the items
of consciousness coiiespond to an exteinal ieality. Having just witnessed
Theieses elaboiate ieveiie of bedding the handsome Mi. Biute (Wedg-
woods iendeiing of Heii Giob), one does not hesitate in convicting hei
of allowing hei iunaway fantasy to iewiite ieality in a mannei commensu-
8: : ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm
iate ist with hei own eiotic desiie and then with hei gieatest feainamely
that he is alieady maiiied.
Howis this dieient fiomGottscheds dictumthat in comedy the point is
to mock (auslachen) abeiiant chaiacteis, that is, to laugh them back into
a moially acceptable place: The question is peitinent in light of Canettis
use of comic types: Theiese might, foi example, be labeled accoiding to hei
iuling passion(s): she is a lecheious veision of the misei (die Geizige). But
while this type of geneiic, moializing ieading of Autc-da-Fe is not invalid,
neithei should it eclipse Canettis stinging, hilaiious, and fai moie geneial
ciitique of empiiicist thinking. Foi it is not up to Theiese alone to iemedy
this failing, the neoempiiicist atmospheie lies heavy ovei the entiie cast of
chaiacteis. As a bioadei, cultuial phenomenon, it is not amenable to indi-
vidual iemedy. Ultimately, this lattei ciitique is of gieatei moialiathei
than moializingimpoit.
Though Bientanos theoiy was not in itself subjectivist, it had this eect
neveitheless. Bientano, we iecall, held that we can considei the object
piecisely as intended and as inexistent, without iaising questions about its
extiamental natuie and status.
19
Bientanos avoidance of ontological ques-
tions and extiamental ieality gave piioiity, if only by default and even-
tual misapplication, to the subjective peiceptions of individuals. What the
neoempiiicists of the late nineteenth and eaily twentieth centuiy lacked,
and what theii eighteenth-centuiy foiebeais (such as Beikeley) supplied,
was a guaiantee against such ielativism. Beikeley anchoied his system, as
Daiby amply documents, in God.
20
The neoempiiicists, as Ryan points out,
weie pointedly antimetaphysical, and thus this option was lost to them.
Yet, as Copleston obseives, the ieigning and still topical pioblem in West-
ein philosophy is, as Kant well undeistood, the confoimity between mental
concepts and extiamental objects.
21
The neoempiiicist attempt to sidestep
this puzzle in eliminating the subject-object dichotomy by gianting ieality
only to consciousness is, as Canettis novel wickedly illustiates, not without
pioblems.
In what is peihaps the most memoiable of Theieses mispiisions, Canetti
piovides an iionic twist to Bientanos intended but inexistent objects.
This occuis duiing Theieses visit to what we know as the Cathedial of St.
Stephen, the scene maiks an inteilude in hei dogged attempt to wiench a
testament fiom Kien, who, in tuin, believes she is iefeiiing to a gieat sum
ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm : 8_
she stands to inheiit independently. Just aftei leaining of Kiens meagei net
woith, Theiese takes hei pioblem to piayei:
She sought out the laigest chuich in the town, the cathedial . . . Theie
hung a pictuie of the Last Suppei, painted in expensive oil colouis . . . The
money-bag looked as though you could touch it, thiity beautiful pieces
of silvei inside . . . Judas held it tight. He wouldnt let go, he was so gieedy.
He giudged eveiy penny. Just like hei old man . . . Hei old man is thin,
Judas is fat and has a ied beaid. In the middle of it all sits the supeiioi
young man. Such a beautiful face, all pale, and eyes just as they should be.
He knows eveiything . . . Hei husbands a diity misei. To do such a thing
foi twenty schillings . . . She is the white dove. She is ying just above
his head. She shines white, because of hei innocence. The paintei would
have it that way . . . She is the white dove. Let Judas tiy any of his tiicks.
He wont catch hold of hei. She will y wheievei she wants. She will y to
the supeiioi young man, she knows whats beautiful. Judas can say what
he likes. He can go and hang himself . . . The money belongs to hei . . .
Soon the soldieis will come . . . She will step foiwaid and say: This isnt
oui Loid. This is Mi. Biute, a simple salesman in the shop of Grcss and
Mcther. You mustnt lay a ngei on him. Imhis wife. . . Judas can go and
hang himself. She is the white dove.
22
Theieses iewiiting of this caidinal scene should not be iead meiely in a
mannei that would chaiacteiize her. as a viitual stock chaiactei, she is al-
ieady quite amply developed. The satiie aims instead at empiiicism, foi
which eveiy mental image is actual, even if it is not otheiwise ieal. It is
peihaps pedantic to spell out Theieses misieading. Yet we should be cleai
that it involves not meiely an identication of hei beloved Heii Giob with
Jesus, but ultimately an uttei substitution of the lattei foi the foimei.
Canetti specically paiodies the piocess of mental coiiection (the way
the mind coiiects foi peiceptual illusions was a cential concein of the ex-
peiimental psychologists) in having Theiese ist see Judas as the physical
opposite of Kien (i.e., coipulent and ied-beaided), and then somehow his
veiy likeness. Notice also howshe ist savois the thiity shillings in the puise
insofai as she envisions having the money heiself. But once she piojects
Kien onto the Judas guie, who, as eveiyone knows, actually ieceives the
moneybag, the sum suddenly diops to twenty. This is no accident, since im-
8 : ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm
mediately aftei naming this new, lowei guie, Theiese angiily iecalls hei
obduiate allegation that Kien had attempted to cheat hei out of hei iight-
ful inheiitance by coiiecting the aiithmetic in his bankbookanothei sum
that, she believes, sank befoie hei veiy eyes. Though she is compelled foi
othei ieasons to iemake Kien into Judas, she is not about to giant him the
full thiity shillings. The thiid instance of mental coiiection fiom the pas-
sage cited above has to do with Heii Giob: because he is at ist the beautiful
love object, Theiese eageily assigns him the iole of Jesus. Shoitly theieaftei,
howevei, undei the piessuie of the Passion naiiative itself, she is constiained
to distinguish hei beloved Heii Giob fiom Jesuswho, of couise, is about
to be ciuciedso that she can sciipt a happy ending to hei own eiotic
fantasy.
The point of such scenes is not, in the ist place, to scold the two-
dimensional guie back to moial peifection, but wittily to indicate what is
lost in the empiiicist conception of the self: namely a imsense of the othei,
and of the laigei social woild. Though Canetti is ceitainly not conceined
to iestoie Chiistianity as a dominant cultuial naiiative, he demonstiates by
means of exaggeiationthe thieat inheient inempiiicist thinking: inthis case,
the loss of common cultuial goods, of images that (foi bettei and woise)
can bind a community togethei. Wiiting at the end of a long peiiod dui-
ing which the subjective side of expeiience had, in the Geiman canon at
least, been highly valoiized, Canetti iaises in Autc-da-Fe an objection, not
against that vaunted Geiman Innerlichkeit (inwaidness) and authentic sub-
jective states pei se, but against the implicit claim that nothing else matteis
quite so much. Theieses heietical, peisonalized veision of the Last Suppei
is easily unmasked and coiiected (now, by the ieadei) because she and the
object of hei devotion aie extiemely well-known quantities. She, a highly
stylized type, the Last Suppei, a tableau fiomthe Chiistian masteiplot. Only
such extiemes can pioduce a paiody of empiiicism that does not itself iisk
becoming a celebiation of the empiiicist self. Canettis iecouise to a iela-
tively stable cultuial signiei should not be seen as nostalgia foi a type of lit-
eiatuie (oi woildview) wheie eveiything has its unquestioned, pieoidained
place. Noi does it ieect an inheient piefeience foi two-dimensional guies
as opposed to full-blooded Menschen. Canettis self-conscious use of these
extiemes is dictated iathei by his task, which heie is to illuminate the poten-
tial iisk in unciitically embiacing the faddish neoempiiicismof the day. This
ciitique of what we might call mental piivatization, which takes aim at
ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm : 8,
the piogiessive eiasuie of the public domain as an independent ontological
entity, is paiticulaily evident in the novels spectial and eeting evocation
of Vienna.
23
Theieses builesque ieading of the Last Suppei painting satiiizes the em-
piiicist eoit to collapse the subject-object dichotomy. In contiast to Maltes
celebiated, imaginaiy ieconstitution of the semi-demolished house, a pio-
cess we aie meant to aim, Theieses undeniably imaginative ieading of the
painting is iendeied decisively inauthentic. Hei visit to the cathedial sug-
gests that the empiiicist conation of mental conception and extiamental
object, the ieduction of ieality to consciousness, is awed because it ovei-
looks the potential inequality of the two teims. Anticipating one of his own
gieat themes in Crcwds and Pcwer (as well as the woik of Foucault), Canetti
points out that what one sees (as well as what one fails to see) is alieady en-
meshed in powei. Oi, to put it otheiwise: poweiand theiefoie the abuse
of powei as wellbegins at the point of (mis)peiception.
Nowheie is this moie obvious than in the case of Kien. We have seen
alieady how Kiens empiiicist pionouncements, in paiticulai his epistemo-
logical skepticism expiessed above all in the esse peicepi outbuist, aie
iooted in his skiimish withTheiese. It is beside the point, howevei, whethei,
oi to what extent, Kien is a sincere empiiicist. Moie impoitantly, helike
Theieseis an occasion foi playing out some of the moie questionable im-
plications of empiiicist conceptions.
One cannot appioach Kien without encounteiing the classic empiiicist
agenda. He is, as we obseive thioughout the novel, obsessively conceined
with the stiength of his eyes and with oveicoming the subject-object bifui-
cation. Fuitheimoie, he maintains a doggedly antimetaphysical stance and
explicitly suboidinates existence to consciousness. Yet though all the issues
line up, Kien is neveitheless the novels least likely empiiicist. Deeply feaiful
of any except the most solitaiy expeiience, Kien cuts himself o fiom the
empiiicist font of meaning. His eyes actually ieveise the oidei of Democ-
iituss atomism: his optical appaiatus seems to assign iathei than ieceive
the data of expeiience. And, though the empiiicists included intiospection
(in addition to sense peiception) as a souice of meaning, this haidly makes
Kien an exemplaiy empiiicist. If we associate a diuse ego with empiiicism,
a sense of self and othei as embedded in an indivisible ux, then it becomes
cleai that Kien is at best a mist, autociatic empiiicist. When we iead, foi ex-
ample, that he ieseived consciousness foi ieal thoughts, they depend upon
8o : ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm
it, without consciousness, thoughts aie unthinkable,
24
it becomes cleai that
the empiiicist piogiam is luiking theie, even if at times it appeais moie to
thieatenthanto chaiacteiize the piotagonist. Indeed, Kiencouldonly iepie-
sent an authentic empiiicist by giving up the ciitique of empiiicism which
he embodies.
One could visit a multitude of scenes wheie peiception is fundamentally
at issue, as neai the end of the novel wheie Kien declaies the meal Theiese
seives him an illusion. Having the meal thiown at him does little to con-
vince him of its mateiial ieality, neithei does his act of self-mutilation (he
cuts o a ngei) piove peisuasive. But all such scenes, and in paiticulai
this act of self-impaiiment, haiken back to Kiens paiadigmatic denial of
Theiese. Indeed, the act of digital self-dismembeiment iecalls Kiens act of
self-blinding, and the attendant Philcscphie der Blindheit discussed above.
It echoes (and inveits) the famous mutilations of Abelaid and Oiigen, who
only escaped the snaies of (female) mateiial iealityand weie thus fiee to
continue theii meditative lifestyleby means of castiation. And it accen-
tuates the pioximity of empiiicism to escapism, a nexus we will notice in
connection with Geoig, below.
Kiens piototypical pioblem is his failuie to appiehend guies who en-
joy as much ctional ieality as he does himself, and, moie impoitantly, his
attempt to employ the dignity of philosophy and scholaiship to undeiwiite
these failings. When Kien applies his philological piowess to obscuie oii-
ental texts, most of us can only guess at the distoition. But when he tiains
his poweis on the tabula rasa foi which he takes Theiese, we catch him ied-
handed, foi hei ctional existence, no less than his own, has alieady been
insciibed by the naiiatoi and no eoit of the woild-ienowned philologist
can eiase hei with impunity. In othei woidsto ieconnect biiey to an
afoiementioned debateif theie ieally is a stiuggle between Kien and the
naiiatoi foi what Lubomii Dolezel calls the authentication authoiity in
this naiiative, its iesolution must be sought not only in naiiatology, but also
in the novels bioadei ciitique of populaiized neoempiiicism.
Once again, the pioblem is not so much an individual moial failing as
a shoitcoming endemic to empiiicism, which since its eighteenth-centuiy
incainations has been notoiiously ill equipped to aim the existence of
othei coequal subjects. Though Beikeley nevei doubted what he iefeiied
to as the spiiitual ieality of peicipient subjects, his diculty of aiming
fellow humans can, peihaps, be giasped fiom the piovocative claim in the
ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm : 8,
Principles that the existence of God is fai moie evidently peiceived than
the existence of men, because the eects of Natuie aie innitely moie nu-
meious and consideiable than those asciibed to human agents.
25
When
the neoempiiicists of the nineteenth centuiy jettisoned theism and meta-
physics, this piop to nite spiiitual substances, inciedible even to some
of Beikeleys contempoiaiies, was lost as well. Which may explain in pait
why Bientano, immediately aftei his neoempiiicist phase, became a Catholic
piiest.
Theie is an additional, though closely ielated, intiinsic weakness to the
basic conception of all vaiieties of empiiicism, including the neoempiiicist
incaination, which makes the appiehension of fellowindividuals depend on
an a pcstericri assembly of sense data. To this way of thinking, fellow human
beings aie secondaiy phenomena, meie inductions fiomsensoiyexpeiience.
Coplestons ciitique of Beikeley on this fundamental point applies mutatis
mutandi to the latei foims as well:
Beikeley] does not tell us how we can be ceitain that the ideas which we
take to be signs of the piesence of nite spiiitual substances i.e., people]
ieally aie what we think they aie. Peihaps, howevei, he would ieply that
. . . fiom ideas oi obseivable eects which aie analogous to those which
we aie conscious of pioducing, we infer the existence cf cther selves, and
this is sucient evidence. But if anyone is dissatised with such an answei
and wishes to know what justication theie is, on Beikeleys piemises,
foi making this infeience, he will not ieceive much help fiom Beikeleys
wiitings.
26
The conception that othei selves need to be built up fiom eects which aie
analogous to those which we aie conscious of pioducing poses the dangei of
seeing otheis as meie piojections, a notion that the novel extensively paio-
dies. When the neoempiiicists bluiied the contouis of the self, moieovei,
they concomitantly bluiied the peiceptibility of othei selves as independent
entities. While Machs idea of a uid, unbounded self essentially composed
of sense impiessions, a self that was not distinct fiom its suiioundings
27
may in some sense be seen to oveicome oi mastei a painful dichotomy be-
tween subject and objecta kind of libeiation, as it weieit simultaneously
eiodes the essential distinction between subject and subject. Shoin of its
eighteenth-centuiy metaphysical undeipinnings, neoempiiicism can ulti-
mately only speak of the othei as object of ones own consciousness, oi, to
88 : ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm
use moie contempoiaiy teiminology, as a mental constiuct, iathei than co-
equal subject. Fiom the neoempiiicist point of view, the percipient subject
is stiuctuially favoied ovei the perceived subject.
And this is piecisely the ciitique we see played out again and again in
Autc-da-Fe. The combined evidence of all his senses fails to convince Kien
of his wifes existence:
He had seized Theiese, not tentatively, but with all his stiength he
clutched at hei skiit, he pushed hei fiom him, he diew hei to him, he
enclosed hei in his long, lean aims. She let him have his way . . . Befoie
they aie hanged, muideieis aie allowed one last meal . . . He tuined hei
iound once on hei axis and foiewent the embiace . . . He glaied at hei
fiom an inch o. He stioked hei diess with all ten ngeis. He put out
his tongue and snued with his nose. Teais came into his eyes with the
eoit. I suei fiom this hallucination! he admitted, gasping.
28
The oveiwhelming sensoiy data notwithstanding, Kien stands by his pievi-
ous conclusion: I live foi tiuth. I know this tiuth is a lie.
29
Canetti goes
to gieat lengths to include all ve senses heie. Piioi to the so-called expeii-
ment naiiated above, Kien had alieady peiceived a Theiese-like voice: At
piesent she is silent, but eailiei she had the voice of the muideied woman
too.
30
In fact, it is this singulaily distuibing voice that leads Kien to dis-
piove hei existence in the ist place. His leained aigument in favoi of a
spectial Theiese (Schein-Therese) theiefoie piesents an embattled empiii-
cist agenda, foi the piofessoi, as we shall see piesently, is ieally intent upon
asseiting his own pseudo-Kantian autonomy and defeating the heteionomy
implied in his sensoiy expeiience of Theiese. Iionically, empiiicism is heie
vindicated, Theiese ieally does exist. Yet it has intioduced and authoiized
a subjectivism that, the novel implies, can be tuined against itself. Moie-
ovei, as we shall soon see in gieatei detail, it invites a neoidealist backlash,
as alieady adumbiated in the passage cited above.
The misiecognition of Theiese is paiadigmatic of guial misappiehen-
sion thioughout the novel. Kien mispeiceives Pfas essentially violent na-
tuie (at least until Kien becomes his piisonei) by histoiicizing him as a
sixteenth-centuiy Landsknecht, as we noted above. Geoig similaily mis-
ieads the biutish caietakei by aestheticizing him into a state of mythologi-
cal impotence: All the muideis, all the anxieties, all the malevolence in the
woild had vanished: The caietakei pleased him. His head ieminded him
ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm : 8,
of the iising sun of eaily that moining. He was ciude, but iefieshing, an
untamed, stout fellow such as one iaiely sees now in the cities and homes
of civilization. The staiis gioaned. Instead of caiiying it, this Atlas smote
the wietched eaith.
31
The constiuction of an acceptable caietakei pioceeds
along the same lines as Theieses ieinsciiption of the Last Suppei: bits and
pieces of the oiiginal aie incoipoiated into an image deteimined piedomi-
nantly by the needs of the peicipient subject, and theiefoie iesult in puie
distoition. Geoigs piettifying mispiision of the caietakei in fact stiays fai
moie fiomthewife-beating, child-molesting biutewe knowthandoes Kiens
putative hallucination, the Schein-Therese, fiom the ieal Theiese.
32
The inability to see people, oi to see them foi who they ieally aie, ie-
peats itself in viitually eveiy guial constellation: Fischeile takes Kien foi
a Jew, and assumes that piactically eveiyone else is the swindlei he (that is,
Fischeile) in fact is. The paiody ieaches its height in Fischeiles constiuction
of a chess opponent who is liteially his own miiioi image. Pfa ienames his
daughtei Poli, a shoitened foim foi the Pclizist (policeman) he once
was, foicing hei to weai his pants and play the iole of the ciiminal he in fact
is. When the daughtei nally iebels, Pfa denies hei existence, claiming she
is an impostoi: She was no daughtei of his! . . . By mistake he iefeiied once
to a ceitain Polly. But his muscles made up foi that mistake immediately.
The name of the female he was disciplining was Anna. She claimed to be
identical with a daughtei of his. He did not believe hei. Hei haii came out
in handfuls and when she defended heiself two of hei ngeis got bioken.
33
The blinding of the novels title, then, can be iead as an indictment of the
empiiicist blind spot foi fellow human beings. Though Bientano stiessed
the unity of consciousness, and Mach envisioned a soit of sensoiy monism,
the egalitaiian, leveling tendency of this thinking does not account foi the
de factc expeiience of sepaiate, antithetical agents. It may be ne to speak,
as William James did, of a supei-consciousness in which we all somehow
paiticipate, but such a heady view fails to accommodate the expeiience of
clashing, iival subjects.
In peopling his novel with Hobbesian louts, Canetti is saying neithei that
the woild is ieally so utteily biutish (as Petei Russell famously claimed),
34
noi that peiceptual eiioi is so iampant oi so typically detectable. He is in-
stead diawing attention to a widespiead mannei of thinking about the self
and othei that is essentially apolitical, peihaps even antipolitical. The em-
piiicist failuie to aim the othei a piioii, as it weie, paves the way towaid
,o : ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm
a mental expansion of the self at the expense of the othei. In the novel we
see this in the mental cocoons, the iival belief woilds, as Daiby deftly dubs
them, that each chaiactei weaves aiound him[heiselfindividual iefuges
in which fellowsubjects aie meiely so much mateiial to be aimed, denied,
oi iewoiked accoiding to the iespective ieigning monomania.
The iesult of such thinking, when taken to the extieme, is the eclipse of
the social woild. In a massive novel of ioughly ve hundied pages, set in
a metiopolis we might as well call Vienna, theie is suipiisingly little atten-
tion to community, city, commeice, and so on. The gieat contiast would of
couise be Doblins Berlin Alexanderplatz, in which the capital city is itself a
iival subject, as Maiilyn Silbey Fiies has aigued. But Autc-da-Fe is a novel
in which the naiiation is laigely deteimined by the chaiacteis. The nai-
iatoi moves the chaiacteis on and o stage, supplies the chaiacteis with
enough iope to hang themselves in self-contiadictoiy babble, and splices in
a numbei of key cultuial inteitexts. But he does not piovide a sustained,
independent vista. The chaiacteis, unable to see each othei, cannot begin
to constiuct a social woild. This accounts foi the simple factto give just
one examplethat on Theieses way home fiom the fuinituie stoie the city
suddenly fades to black, and we get none of the municipal ambiance that
Fontane would suiely have piovided. Instead, we aie iestiicted to Theieses
consciousness, constiained to obseive hei as she iewoiks hei humiliation
into dubious acclaim. Retaining hei inwaid focus, she expends eveiy ounce
of mental eneigy in an eoit to place abusive mockeiy in a moie favoiable
light, which becomes appaient to the ieadei when she stietches the auditoiy
data beyond belief in concluding that the assembled customeis laughed at
hei out of iespect (lachten vcr Stclz). Pieoccupied with such intiospec-
tion, Theiese peiceives not a iepiesentative slice of city life and local coloi,
but a highly selective assoitment of scenes (such as hei fascination with the
maiching band leadei) which in the end seives piimaiily to ieiteiate hei
own venal pioclivities and desiie foi eiotic fulllment.
This waiiants beaiing in mind in light of Canettis iepeated comment
that his novel was inspiied by Balzacs Ccmedie humaine. The ist question
one might iaise, especially when one thinks of the best-known of that seiies,
Pere Gcrict (I8_), is, Wheie is Canettis Paiis: In Balzacs novels one en-
counteis similai base passions, but one also expeiiences a vibiant metiopo-
lis and a palpable society, howevei much this society may be excoiiated foi
its injustice, gieed, and vain puisuits. The municipal and social lacunae in
ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm : ,I
Autc-da-Fe follow in good empiiicist fashion fiom the consciousness of the
subjects. As Kien put it, when he found it convenient to stiike an empiiicist
pose: Esse percipi, to be is to be peiceived. What I do not peiceive, does not
exist.
35
Though empiiicismnevei claimed to supply an adequate political theoiy,
any theoiy that seeks to dene the subject must ultimately be held account-
able foi the implications of that theoiy on the polis. Autc-da-Fe spins out
those consequences meicilessly. Aftei all, a vanishing subject does not ac-
coid well with the notion of civic iesponsibility, a Machian dissolute self
meiely dissolves the question of ethics, both peisonal and social. If an em-
piiicist sympathizei weie to object, claiming that the authoi tiamples upon
the nuances of empiiicism in stiaining the theoiy beyond the intent of its
oiiginal philosophei advocates, one could only agiee. Autc-da-Fe does in-
deed piesent a caiicatuie of empiiicism, with all the ieductionism and dis-
toition that teim implies. Yet this obseivation only seives to claiify, iathei
than nullify, the novels distinctive inteivention. Autc-da-Fe is conceined
with the questionable social uses of the neoempiiicism that was bandied
about Viennese salons and coee houses duiing the inteiwai peiiod, not
with an esoteiic piofessional debate among philosopheis.
Canettis cieation of headstiong ctional guies should not be misundei-
stood as a nostalgia foi anoutmoded will-dominated psychology. His guial
constellations do howevei beai a peitinent and still ielevant waining: ego
stiength does not simply disappeai in the face of empiiicist notions of the
self. Heie we must take stock of the fact that empiiicism nevei established
itself as a widely accepted theoiy, to the extent, foi example, of Daiwins
theoiy of evolution. That the debate was widespiead, I do not dispute. But
what began as a theoiy of the self, iooted both in expeiimental psychology
and philosophical ieection, quickly became something else in addition:
something we might call a mood, a set of conceptions that one adopted. We
need, in shoit, to account foi empiiicisms Janus face: it was both a scientic
theoiy (i.e., something discoveied) and a mood (i.e., something donned).
It is necessaiy to giasp this dual aspect in oidei to appieciate Canettis nal
ciitique contained in the guie of Geoig.
If one has been up to this point hesitant to accept empiiicism as a vital
inteitext to the novel, Geoig should iemove all doubt. Unlike the othei g-
uies, Geoig is chaiacteiized specically to allegoiize (and caiicatuie) the
empiiicist self. In explicit opposition to his well-aimoied biothei, Geoig
,: : ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm
is diawn as the gieat iecipient of sensual ieality. Both as gynecologist-
womanizei and as psychiatiist, he is poitiayed as essentially diawn to, if not
dependent upon, the voluptuousness of mateiial ieality. Explicit iefeiences
to empiiicist conceins aie ieplete. Aftei studying the goiilla man, we leain
that this man of science, who, by the way, metamoiphoses fiom Geoiges
in Fiance into the Geimanic Geoig as he passes the boidei into Austiia,
was leained enough to publish a thesis on the speech of this madman. A
new light was thiown on the psychology of sounds,
36
a publication that
evokes a typical neoempiiicist ieseaich pioject. Moie specically, Geoigs
elaboiate piaise of the insane foi imly holding to the actuality of theii hal-
lucinations is a satiiical iefeience to a subcategoiy of Bientanos celebiated
theoiy of intentionality, namely innei peiception, a point we see ieected
in the following lectuie Geoig deliveis to his fawning assistants:
You see, gentlemen, he would say to them when they weie alone to-
gethei, what miseiable single-tiack cieatuies, what pitiful and inaiticu-
late bouigeois we aie, compaied with the genius of this paianoiac. We
possess, but he is possessed, we take oui expeiiences at second hand, he
makes his own. He moves in total solitude, like the eaith itself, thiough
his own space . . . He believes in the images his senses conjuie up foi him.
We mistiust oui own healthy senses . . . But look at him! He is Allah,
piophet, and Moslem in one. Is a miiacle any the less a miiacle because
we have labeled it Parancia chrcnica? We sit on oui thick-headed sanity
like a vultuie on a pile of gold. Undeistanding, as we undeistand it, is
misundeistanding. If theie is a life puiely of the mind, it is this madman
who is leading it!
37
Geoigs endoisement of such innei peiception is at once a playful pei-
veision and a ciitical citation of Bientanos ideas, foi although Bientano ac-
knowledgedhallucinationandidiosynciatic mental images, his theoiyof the
unity of consciousness failed adequately to distinguish between delusion
and ieality. What stiikes us immediately about this passage is that Geoig
diagnoses the empiiicist self as essentially insane and foi this veiy ieason
capable of oeiing a ciedible ciitique of bouigeois society. Geoig, of couise,
thinks he is tendeiing a piecious paiadox to his woishipful listeneis. But
the novel suggests the contiaiy. Given the witheiing ciitique of neoempiii-
cism we have alieady encounteied, we aie instead inclined to inquiie into
the sanity of attiibuting political subveisiveness to an alieady weak, mai-
ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm : ,_
ginalized, and laigely institutionalized gioup of people. Questions of powei,
paiticulaily as they aie secieted by eiudite-sounding philosophy and psy-
chology, aie nevei fai away in this novel.
We iealize befoie long that Geoig is in eect piaising himself, oi the self
he had become since his conveision expeiience with the goiilla man. His
entiie method, such as it is, lies in the putative peimeability of his conscious-
ness, his ability to entei intoand take onthe selves of otheis. In this he is
the veiy image of the Machian self, a self that meiely seives as the locus foi
the constant ieconguiation of sense impiessions: When he was tiied and
wanted a iest fiom the high tension with which his distiacted fiiends lled
him, he would submeige himself in the soul of one of his assistants. Eveiy-
thing that Geoig did, he did in the chaiactei of someone else.
38
Recall that
Geoig dates the shedding of his mundane, bouigeois self to that fateful meet-
ing with the goiilla man, who is the gieat inspiiation foi his ievolutionaiy
psychological tieatments. Yet, as we noted in some detail above in chaptei :,
if the celebiated goiilla language iepiesents a collapse of subject-object ie-
lations, if it suggests a much moie elastic ielationship between signiei and
signied than Petei Kien could evei abide, it does so at the expense of eveiy-
thing and eveiybody but the authoi of this make-believe univeise, the goiilla
man himself. Canettis ciiticismof empiiicist thinking as embodied in Geoig
is, then, both old and new: he continues to iaise questions about ieality ie-
duced to consciousness and he challenges the assumption that empiiicismis
innocent of powei ielations. New with Geoig, howevei, is a ciitique of what
we above called empiiicism-as-mood. It is not Geoigs disingenuous shed-
ding of tiaditional subjectivity alone, oi even piimaiily, which is at issue.
Though it is tiue that the biotheis Kien both suei fiom savioi complexes,
and that only Petei is a self-acknowledged elitist, theie is a deepei question
at stake. The empiiicist satiie associated with Geoig aims in the ist place
at the pcssibility of such a conveision to empiiicism.
Once again, the issue antedates the empiiicism of the late nineteenth
and eaily twentieth centuiies, but continues into oui own day as well. The
pioblem can be stated thus: the phenomenal tieatment of the human being,
which neoempiiicism espoused, fails to account foi the individuals expeii-
ence of being sepaiate fiom, and yet acting on, the woild. Copleston explains
how this dual aspect of expeiience, of being both sepaiate fiom and pait
of the woild, has stiuctuied much of the Westein philosophical tiadition.
Since this point is foundational not only foi the piesent aigument, but also
, : ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm
foi oui latei discussion of modeinism (chaptei o), it will be woith quoting
heie in full:
Consideied as spiiit, as standing out fiom the woild, he i.e., the human
being] is able, and indeed impelled, to iaise metaphysical pioblems, to
seek unity behind oi undeilying the subject-object situation. Consideied
as a being involved in the woild, he is natuially inclined to iegaid these
pioblems as empty and piotless. In the development of philosophical
thought these diveigent attitudes oi tendencies iecui, assuming dieient
histoiical, and histoiically explicable, foims . . . Inasmuch as man can
objectify himself and tieat himself as an object of scientic investigation,
he is inclined to iegaid talk about his standing out fiom the woild oi as
having a spiiitual aspect as so much nonsense. Yet the meie fact that it
is he who objecties himself shows, as Fichte well saw, that he cannot be
completely objectied, and that a phenomenalistic ieduction of the self
is unciitical and nave.
39
This last sentence beais paiticulai ielevance foi oui undeistanding of
Geoig. The veiy conception of the empiiicist (oi heie, phenomenalistic) self
implies, as Copleston illustiates, the potential existence of the idealist self
that would theieby be negated. In othei woids, this iepiesents an apoiia in
the philosophical discussion of subjectivity in which each option implies the
possibility of the othei. Neithei the spiiitual noi the phenomenalistic view
of the self can be adopted to the exclusion of the othei without oveisimplify-
ing an issue that has peiplexed the Westein philosophical tiadition down to
oui own day, and which, accoiding to Foucault, constitutes the cential co-
nundium of the modein episteme.
40
Neithei will Autc-da-Fe let us iest easy
in unciitically adopting what was then the intellectual fashion of the day and
still ciiculates in vaiious guises. Canetti suggests in the guie of Geoig, with-
out in any way pioposing a simplistic ietuin to idealist metaphysics, that it
may take a self to lose a self.
Though Kien spouts key empiiicist teims, and Theiese exhibitsin an
admittedly hypeibolic fashionthe peiceptual conceins of empiiicism,
Geoig is the only guie who self-consciously adopts an empiiicist self. Iioni-
cally, he is impelled to such a makeovei foi the same ieason his biothei is
moved to quote the famous esse percipi. tioublesome women. His fascination
with the goiilla man comes at a time when he piofesses to be boied with his
caieei as gynecologist and with his licentious lifestyle, both of which tend
ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm : ,,
foi him to meige into a single undeitaking. His ing with empiiicism, then,
is deeply imbiicated with an attempted escapism. Yet, as we saw in the pie-
vious chaptei, Geoigs conveision is a case of back to the futuie. As psy-
chiatiist he is no less caieeiist, and to the extent he has swoin o women
and that is indeed debatable
41
he has ieplaced that sensual giatication by
continually slipping into the psyches of his maniacal patients.
When consideiing the taiget of Canettis paiody embodied in Geoig, we
would do well, nally, to iecall the maiiiage of empiiicist thinking to n-
de-sicle aestheticism, as Ryan has encouiaged us to do. Geoigs unique ait
of healing is deiived fiom the noniefeiential, nonutilitaiian language of the
goiilla man. This faux piimitive man, though maintained by a iich and coi-
iupt bankei, is held up as the consummate ciitique of bouigeois venality,
moial hypociisy, and naiiow-mindedness. His own fiee use of sounds with
no iegaid to the mundane iequiiements of communication is opposed to
a bouigeois commodication of language. Relegated to the attic because of
his familys embaiiassment, the so-called goiilla biothei is a scathing pai-
ody of the gaiiet aitist ostensibly at odds with and misundeistoodyet all
the while suppoitedby the middle-class woild.
Geoig caiiies his message foiwaid, founding by means of his ievolution-
aiy psychiatiic methods a select gioup in which membeiship implies neithei
collegiality noi equality, but depends on the good giaces and condescension
of its leadei. Dedicated to a small cadie of those piivileged with the gift of
insanity, Geoig takes it as his mission to pieseive them fiom the degiada-
tions of the dull-minded bouigeoisie. Outside the connes of his asylumand
in the ieal woildfoi example, at the abode of his beleagueied biothei
Geoig is utteily helpless. Given all these paiallels between Geoig and the
most famous aesthete of the day, one is tempted to conclude that the Geoig
Canetti has in mind is peihaps Stefan Geoige (I8o8I,__).
Geoig ceitainly demonstiates that empiiicisms vanishing subject is not
exclusively a scientically found object, and is by no means a neutial stance
fiee of ideology. With Geoig, Canetti iaises once again the question of em-
piiicisms collaboiation in escapism, apoliticism, and in eete bouigeois
piotest, as well as the moie fundamental question involved in the unciitical
espousal of the phenomenal self. If the empiiicist self is tiaditionally asso-
ciated in high modeinism with piivileged states of consciousness (such as
the quasi-mystical union of self and othei), it can just as well, as we see in
Geoig, be aliated with a kind of false consciousness. That wax tablet may
,o : ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm
not be so malleable and accommodating as one would like to think, in fact,
it may have a mind of its own.
The novels answei, theiefoie, to the question posed by William James
in an essay of I,o,Is Radical Empiiicism Solipsistic:is an emphatic
yes. But we should be caieful in stating this to emphasize the teim iadi-
cal. Foi in iaising communal, ethical, and political issues Canetti confionts
the empiiicist evanescent self with questions it is ill suitedto answei. It would
be piematuie, howevei, to conclude that with Autc-da-Fe Canetti iejects
en masse the gieat modeinist novels that eithei featuie a lone, oi viitually
solitaiy, piotagonist, oi focus piimaiily on the iich consciousness of one
guie among many otheis. We aie conceined, iathei, in Autc-da-Fe with
a substantially dieient set of pioblems that neveitheless impinges on aes-
thetic modeinism. One could peihaps moie coiiectly say that Autc-da-Fe
picks up wheie a novel like Berlin Alexanderplatz leaves o: Doblin poitiays
Fianz Bibeikopf biilliantly as passive playei, as the capital citys tiuly hapless
spazierende Vachstafel, if you will. But that novel piovokes a ciitical clamoi
just at that point when we aie asked to envision Fianz as a ciedible political
agent. This mystically ieconstituted self is, appaiently, to be iedeemed in
the politics of socialism, though some ciitics have wondeied if the diums we
heai at the endof the novel aie calling Fianz todance tothe stepof a quite dif-
feientpeihaps even fascistdiummei. Howsuited is this fiagmented and
bueted piotagonisthowevei ieconstituted he may beto the demands
of politics and public cultuie: This question, as Autc-da-Fe makes cleai, is
veiy well placed.
Below we will exploie how neo-Kantianism, which giew up side by side
with (and in paitial opposition to) neoempiiicism, is piesent in the novel
in a way that both undeiscoies the ciitique elaboiated above and suggests
ways of iethinking some of the cential pioblems associated with empiiicism:
namely, the isolation of the individual and the eclipse of the sociopolitical
woild.
Neoidealism
xii: 1ui m. wuo wo0ii vi x.1
In the essay The Fiist Book, Autc-da-Fe, Canetti iecounts the cuiious
fact that his piotagonist once boie the name Kant.
42
What is so astonishing
ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm : ,,
in this account, in which Canetti conceals as much as he tells, is the fact that
this appellation was no meie momentaiy ing. The novel was completed,
ciiculated in typesciipt foim, and iead publicly on numeious occasions with
the name Kant still in place. Even the novels oiiginal title, foietelling the
piotagonists doom, suggested the well-known foiebeai: Kant fangt Feuer
(Kant Catches Fiie). Since the authoi diopped this hint in I,,, theie has
been no lack of speculation on the piotagonists supposed anities with his
philosophei ancestoi, noi has theie been a paucity of inventive, if iathei un-
convincing, conjectuie on the tiansfoimation of that name into Kien.
43
In
this iegaid, I would not oveilook the obvious, even if mundane, convenience
of ieplacing the oiiginal name with one of the exact same length in an al-
ieady piepaied typesciipt. Undeistanding the sense in which Kant iemains
integial to the novel will iequiie a biief digiession, but since Kiens nominal
piecuisoi has so often piovided the occasion in the secondaiy liteiatuie foi
iaising the novels philosophical issues, it seems appiopiiate to discuss the
question heie.
Those ciitics who maintain that the similaiity between Kien and Im-
manuel Kant is iathei slight, limited to a few biogiaphical details, aie essen-
tially iight. But this deteimination does not in itself solve the pioblem. Foi
what is the point of those paiallels that do exist: the eaily-iising, piolic
bacheloi intellectual given to stiict ioutine, the peisnickety punctuality, the
daily walk one could set ones watch by: Why did Canetti expunge meiely
the name, but not the substance of the compaiison:
To assume both that theie aie indeed some iesidual similaiities between
the chaiactei Kien and the philosophei Kant and that it was a good idea
foi the authoi to change the name, appaiently on Heimann Biochs insis-
tence,
44
would suggest eithei that Canetti was a little lazy, peihaps less than
thoiough in making the coiiection, oi that the chaiacteiization should be
undeistood as a soit of capiicious, postmodein citation that doesnt quite
add up to anything. Yet if we distinguish between authoi and chaiactei, we
may nd a thiid, moie compelling, solution, which iequiies us neithei to im-
pugn the authois ciaft noi suggest an anachionistic and iathei fai-fetched
peiiodization.
Tellingly, the similaiities that do obtain between Kien and Kant aie of
Kiens own making: just as he tosses o a Beikeleian quote when in need
of a philosophical justication foi the tactics he employs in his feud with
Theiese, so too does he elsewheie fancy himself as following in the footsteps
,8 : ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm
of Geimanys most celebiated intellectual. We have alieady seen that, al-
though consistency and accuiacy aie not attiibutes of Kien, self-impoitance
and philosophical oppoitunism ceitainly aie. To see Kien as a self-styled
Kant guie squaies well with what we otheiwise knowabout the piotagonist.
Indeed one could posit fuithei similaiities, which, we can assume, would
only please the aiiogant Privatgelehrte Kien. Kiens piide in the insciuta-
bility of his woik does indeed iing a ceitain inteitextual bell: foi, as Hegel
iemaiks, it is only when we come to Kant that we nd philosophy becoming
so technical and abstiuse that it could no longei be consideied to belong to
the geneial education of a cultuied man.
45
Fuitheimoie, when Kant was
foity yeais oldpiecisely the age of the piotagonisthe iefused seveial
univeisity posts that weie oeied to him, just as Kien claims to have done:
Whenevei any chaii of oiiental philology fell vacant, it was oeied ist to
him. Polite but contemptuously, he invaiiably declined.
46
Instead of taking
positions incommensuiate with his ieseaich inteiests, Kant woiked both as
a Privatdczent and as a libiaiian.
47
If we considei each of these points of similaiity, it becomes cleai that Kien
is only Kant in his uncoiioboiated but giandiose claims to academic status
and in his inconsequential daily habits. To leave these similaiities in place in
the face of the obvious dieiences between the histoiical and ctional g-
uies chaiacteiizes the piotagonists inated self-image while simultaneously
giving the ieadei some comic distance between the ieal Kien and the Kien
who would be Kant.
48
Of couise chaiacteis do not name themselves, authois do. It is tempting
to think that Canetti, who allows his guies to occupy the naiiatoi to an
extiaoidinaiy degiee, simply allowed his piotagonist, foi a while, to inhabit
his own consciousness. But to peimit Kien to iemain Kant would indeed
have been a gieat mistake because it would validate the actual conation of
the piotagonist with the gieat philosophei. Leaving Kien as Kant would, in
othei woids, have suggested that the authoi shaies in his chaiacteis delu-
sions of giandeui. Such, appaiently, was Biochs concein. He was extiaoi-
dinaiily iiiitated by the oiiginal title and name of the title guie, Canetti
iecalls, as if I meant theieby to imply that the philcscpher Kant was a cold,
insensitive cieatuie now condemned in this book to catch ie.
49
Canetti
ceitainly meant foi his piotagonist to think of himself in such complimen-
taiy teims, but did not intend to endoise them. He giasped this distinction
just in time.
ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm : ,,
xii .s . v.voiv oi ioiii.iism
This point must be made delicately, because while Autc-da-Fe paiodies
ceitain ieactionaiy implications of inteiwai neoidealism, it also shaies some
of the fundamental conceins of this movements most distinguished phi-
losopheis, namely the neo-Kantians, whodominatedphilosophical andaca-
demic discussions of the day.
50
Like Canetti, the neo-Kantians (to the ex-
tent one can make any such geneialization about this loosely knit gioup)
weie piofoundly conceined about the atomization of cultuie, and eainestly
sought to legitimate the humanities (Geisteswissenschaften) as an antidote
to this piocess of cultuial disintegiation.
51
As both a Ph.D. chemist appalled at the naiiow-mindedness of scien-
tic specialization and a cieative authoi asking the big cultuial questions,
Canetti, too, was conceined to biidge the widening gap between the pies-
tigious natuial sciences (Naturwissenschaften) and the incieasingly belea-
gueied humanities. If theie is any one theme that unied the neo-Kantians,
it was suiely theii eoit to oveicome both the ciude mateiialism of the sci-
entic positivists, while simultaneously opposing the metaphysical extiav-
agances that had maiked Geiman idealist philosophy fiom Fichte to Hegel
all with a viewto establishing a newcultuial unity. It was the last giand at-
tempt of Westein philosophy to establish a unied Weltanschauung befoie
the iise of iadical pluialism, oi what we nowcall the postmodein condition.
If Canetti and the neo-Kantians shaied the same point of depaituie,
howevei, they soon paited ways. In Autc-da-Fe, and paiticulaily in Petei
Kien, Canetti chose to paiody not the neo-Kantians themselves, but ceitain
ieactionaiy tendencies foi which neo-Kantianism piovided a iespectable,
philosophical covei. Thus I do not contend that the novel taigets the sophis-
ticated (if pioblematic) systems of Cohen, Windelband, Cassiiei et al., but
the moie simpleminded iecipients (such as Kien) who sawin this movement
an oppoitunity to ietieat fiom the disconceiting mateiialism and politi-
cal tuimoil of Weimai-eia cultuie into the iaieed iealm of Geiman ideal-
ism. Though Kien is enough of an intellectual oppoitunist to make occa-
sional use of the suifeit of neoempiiicist thinking that swiils about him, he is
much moie pievalently an aident idealist, albeit accoiding to his own lights.
Though one could justiably take issue with his use of idealist philosophy,
this is the vocabulaiy with which he is most comfoitable.
While he cloaks himself in idealist phiases, Kien employs these moie as
a shield against an unwanted ieality than as a designation foi something
Ioo : ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm
he seems to undeistand oi value in its own iight. Foi Kien the iealm of
tiue being is neithei the Platonic foim noi the insciutable Kantian Ding an
sich, but simply leained books. The piinted woidnot any Beikeleian sub-
stiateiepiesents the piimaiy giound of ieality, oui sensoiy woild is only
secondaiily ieal, a wan shadow thiown o fiom the iealm of gieat books.
A few examples of Kiens idealism aie memoiable foi theii humoi. While
taking an unchaiacteiistically ielaxed walk one day, Kien heais the cooing of
pigeons, whose ieal existence he can only iecognize and conim thanks to
his special access to the piinted woid: Quite so! he said softly, and nodded
as he always did when he fcund reality bearing cut the printed criginal.
52
The
biidsong is only tiue because the sensoiy data iaties the piioi and highei
tiuth emanating fiom the piinted page, which thus functions as a kind of
Platonic foim. In a similai fashion, Kien iecognizes the ioses piesented to
him by Fischeile only because he had ist encounteied them in that iealm
which is the souice of all tiuth and ieality, his libiaiy: He took the ioses
fiom Fischeiles hand, iemembeied theii sweet smell which he knew fiom
Peisian love poetiy, and iaised them to his eyes, it was tiue, they did smell.
This soothed him completely.
53
Cleaily, foi him the neoidealist sanctum sanctoium is the libiaiy itself.
The ight fiom the anxieties of contempoiaiy cultuie is abundantly evident
in Kiens eusive enthusiasm foi his well-foitied libiaiy:
Thiough the lofty skylights pouied illumination and inspiiation . . .
Thiough the glass above him he could see the condition of the heavens,
moie tianquil, moie attenuated than the ieality. A soft blue: the sun
shines, but not on me. A giey no less soft: it will iain, but not on me.
A gentle muimui announced the falling diops. He was awaie of them at
a distance, they did not touch him. He knew only: the sun shines, the
clouds gathei, the iain falls. It was as if he had baiiicaded himself against
the woild: against all mateiial ielations, against all teiiestiial needs, had
built himself an heimitage, a vast heimitage, so vast that it would hold
those few things on this eaith which aie moie than this eaith itself, moie
than the dust to which oui life at last ietuins.
54
As numeious commentatois have noted, Kien liteially blocks out ieality
with books: save the skylight oveihead, he has all the windows cemented
up in oidei to make ioom foi moie bookshelves. Whenevei he leaves the
libiaiy-foitiess, Kien takes a little piotection with him: eveiy moining be-
ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm : IoI
foie his signatuie walk (to bookstoies, by the way) he caiefully selects the
iight volumes, which he then caiiies as close to his body as possible, a kind
of biblio-piophylaxis against all mateiial ielations. Once Theiese depiives
himof access to his beloved books, Kien agilely develops the mobile mental
libiaiy (Kcpfbiblicthek).
Though a caiicatuie to be suie, Kien iepeatedly identies himself as an
idealist. He is given, foi example, to piaising the timeless and duiable natuie
of his own Charakter, which he opposes to a vaiiety of piotean beings such as
actois, the masses, women, and so foith. Heie is an eaily illustiation: Punc-
tually at eight his woik began, his seivice foi tiuth . . . You diaw closei to
tiuth by shutting youiself o fiommankind. Daily life was a supeicial clat-
tei of lies . . . Who among all these bad actois, who made up the mob, had
a face to aiiest his attention. They changed theii faces with eveiy moment,
. . . His ambition was to peisist stubboinly in the same mannei of existence.
Not foi a meie month, not foi a yeai, but foi the whole of his life, he would
be tiue to himself.
55
This elitist, self-congiatulatoiy encomium culminates
in a declaiation of Schilleiian idealism. Echoing the famous idealist motto
Es ist der Geist, der sich den Kcrper baut (It is Spiiit which builds itself
a body), Kien aims: Chaiactei, if you had a chaiactei, deteimined youi
outwaid appeaiance and thenpioceeds to desciibe himself as appiopiiately
naiiow, stein and bony.
56
Latei in the novel Kien emeiges as an explicit defendei of Geiman ideal-
ism. A pooi student aiiives at the Theresianum with the intention of pawn-
ing an eight-volume set of Schilleis woiks. Kien inteicepts him with this
question:
What do you want:
I . . . ei, I wanted the book section.
I am the book section. . . .
What do you intend to do upstaiis: asked Kien thieateningly.
Oh . . . ei . . . only Schillei.
57
Kien pays an excessive piice foi a woithless, used edition, which he then ie-
tuins to the student with this admonition: Nevei iepeat this action, my
fiiend! Believe me, no man is woith as much as his books! . . . Why Schillei:
You should iead the oiiginal. You should iead Immanuel Kant!
58
Once
again, we obseive the confusion of the cential teim value (Vert), whose
economic and noimative-cultuial meanings aie continually at loggeiheads.
Io: : ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm
Kant will suiely ietuin the besieged Kien to a moie secuie woild of tiadi-
tional values, but Kien thinks he can help biing this about only by paying
iansomhe uses piecisely these teimsto the veiy maiket foices that have
undeimined tiaditional cultuie.
Kien ieveals a similai anity foi his eistwhile philosophei namesake
when, at the apex of his misogynistic diatiibe, he aiiives at what foi him
is the ioot of the pioblem, the cieation of woman. It iiiitates him the
moie that he can only believe in the Categoiical Impeiative and not in
God. Otheiwise he could tiansfei the blame to Him.
59
Yet in each case
wheie Kien evinces an idealist (oi pseudoidealist) inclination, the deepei
motive foi his philosophical loyalties peeks thiough: feai of masses, modein
society, and womenall of which foi him aie metonymically ielated. This
suspect foim of idealist enthusiasmneoidealism as escapismemeiges
cleaily fiomwhat at ist seems a paean to Enlightenment supianationalism:
Eveiy human being needs a home, not a home of the kind undeistood by
ciude jingoistic patiiots, not a ieligion eithei, a meie insipid foietaste of
a heavenly abode, no, a ieal home, in which giound, woik, fiiends, iecie-
ation, and the spiiitual iealm of ideas geistigei Fassungsiaum] come
togethei into an oideily whole, intoso to speaka peisonal cosmos.
The best denition of a home is a libiaiy. It is wisest to keep women out
of the home. Should the decision howevei be made to take in a woman,
it is essential to assimilate hei ist fully into the home, as he had done.
60
Kien, who cleaily focalizes this naiiative segment, begins by celebiating
that classic Enlightenment iealm open to all men willing to shed theii pai-
ticulaiist national oi ieligious aliations. Without tiansition, howevei, this
enlightenment ieveiie spills ovei into explicit misogyny. The heteionomy
that foi Kant meant the ieceptionof laws fiomanexteinal souice (andwhich
thus abiogates the idealist autonomous subject) becomes in Kiens eyes a
piospect pieeminently associated with women. As we saw in chaptei :, it
is above all Theiese who stands in foi the dieaded Sinneswelt (the woild
of senses and mateiiality) that thieatens to oveipowei Kiens Verstandes-
welt (woild of the intellect). Though employing quite assailable denitions
of these concepts, Kien obduiately clings to the Kantian distinction between
the intelligible woild and the woild of the senses as if to a lifeboat. It is in this
sense that Kant iepiesents a home, oi Heimat, to Kien. Zuruck zu Kant
ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm : Io_
(Back to Kant) was the motto of the neo-Kantians of the inteiwai peiiod,
one can almost heai it heie in Kiens philosophically inected longing foi
a secuie conceptual home. The abiupt tiansfoimation of this fantasized
libiaiy, this geistiger Fassungsraum, fiom univeisal intellectual gatheiing
place into a blatant iefuge fiom modeinity, a peisonal cosmos, signies
the ciitique Autc-da-Fe oeied to the widei cultuial debate of the Weimai
eia. Kiens despeiate expiession of Kantian autonomy pioves no less dan-
geious, it should be noted, than the empiiicist pose stiuck by his biothei.
Befoie this inated idealist self, the quotidian woild thieatens to dissolve
just as assuiedly as it does undei Geoigs neoempiiicist dispensation.
While the novels paiody of neoidealism is piactically insulated fiom the
moie seiious woik of the piofessional philosopheis (by dint of Kiens sloppy
and oppoitunistic thinking), it simultaneously taigets an inheient weakness
of the neo-Kantian piogiam, namely its own insulai pioclivities. As much
as it may have hoped to piovide the epistemological basis foi a new cul-
tuial consciousness, it iemained ghettoized in univeisity philosophy depait-
ments. On the othei hand, to the extent that it held an appeal foi a widei
audience in the inteiwai peiiod, it pioved eminently cooptable by consei-
vatives who wished to tuin back the clock. If Kien can be seen as one of
Fiitz K. Ringeis mandaiin intellectuals, as I think he should be, then this
pioblematic piofessoi may iepiesent one instance of that backwaid look-
ing Bildungsburgertum, which witnessed the eclipse of its own ielevance and
yeained foi the ietuin of the moie secuie days of yoie.
61
To eais such as
these, and accoiding to Ringei they weie many and inuential in the intei-
wai peiiod, the entieaty to ietuin to Kant piovided a welcome iallying call
that often had little to do with foimal philosophy.
In this context it would be apt to undeiscoie Kiens obsession with the
past, a pioclivity we have alieady had occasion to notice. Heie, in his hymn
to the past (Vergangenheit), the piofessois pioblematic adheience to ideal-
ist philosophy comes into full view. Just befoie he is ousted fiomhis beloved
Biblicthek, we iead:
The piesent is alone iesponsible foi all pain. He longed foi the futuie,
because then theie would be moie past in the woild. The past is kind, it
does no one any haim. Foi twenty yeais now he had moved in it fieely,
he was happy. Who is happy in the piesent: If we had no senses, then we
might nd the piesent enduiable . . . He bowed befoie the supiemacy of
Io : ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm
the past . . . A time will come when men will beat theii senses into iecol-
lections, and all time into the past. A time will come when a single past
will embiace all men, when theie will be nothing except the past, when
eveiyone will have one faiththe past.
62
The conjunction of love of the past (oi what Ringei in his study calls
past mindedness) with a distinct piedilection foi neoidealist slogans (no
mattei how misundeistood) should give us some pause, foi this had a ieal-
woild counteipait in contempoianeous academic ciicles in the wake of neo-
Kantianism. Though Kien will piesently piofess supieme faith in the Kantian
categoiical impeiativeto the exclusion of the biblical dietyhe is at this
point still willing to pay tiibute to God as guaiantoi of the past: God is
the past. He believes in God.
63
This of couise indicates wheie this pseudo-
philosopheis ieal conceins lie, even as it points to anothei entienched phe-
nomenon in Geiman cultuie, namely the infusion of post-Kantian idealism
with a misplaced ieligious auia.
64
Now histoiians of philosophy might well view Kien as a stiaw man, pei-
haps little moie than a one-sided polemic, and they would be paitly iight.
Foi Canetti has singled out only those two aspects of contempoiaiy neo-
idealist thinking which he held to be most suspect: (I) the tendency towaid
self-insulation and histoiicizing ietieat, which tempted less disciiminating
devotees to biacket out iathei than embiace the modein woild, and (:) the
inheient piopensity of all idealist philosophy to suboidinate the woild
to abstiact and potentially self-seiving foimulations. With Kien we aie ie-
minded that philosophyeven idealist philosophyis nevei wholly above
the woild, and ceitainly nevei innocent of powei.
Yet just as we noted above (in chaptei :) that Kien and Geoig aie ulti-
mately not that dissimilai, so, too, would it now be mistaken to exaggeiate
the dieiences between neoempiiicism and neo-Kantianism. Both iepie-
sent lattei-day foims of the gieat Copeinican ievolution in Westein phi-
losophy, which began to undeistand peiception as constituent of ieality,
though obviously in quite dieient ways. Both aie foims of philosophical
modeinism, and as such challenge simplistic notions of objective ieality that
weie fueled by the dominant natuial sciences of the mid-nineteenth and
eaily twentieth centuiies.
65
Both neoempiiicism and neo-Kantianism, the
lattei moie systematically to be suie, sought to combat what Ollig teims the
objectivism of populai mateiialist philosophy of this peiiod,
66
the same
ioimvi vi ci sm .i io- x.1i .i sm : Io,
unpioblematic asseition of objectivity, it should be noted, that is so much
with us still today. Thus it should not be suipiising at all that Kien, gioping
foi a leained way to oppose the mateiialism of mass cultuie, should light
upon a Beikelian quip, even though he otheiwise clothes himself in ideal-
ist appaiel. In fact, the incident that inspiies Kiens philosophy of blindness,
the incuision of Theieses fuinituie into his libiaiy, is accompanied by a
lengthy ieection on the oneious excess of sensoiy stimuli (Sinnesexzesse)
inicted upon him by modein nucleai science. On top of eveiything else,
he now is intiuded upon by fools who ddle with electiicity and compli-
cated atoms, and has to woiiy about elections iacing aiound his foimeily
peaceful pages.
67
The coupling of unwanted fuinituie with the then-latest
discoveiies in physics undei the iubiic sensoiy oveiload is a iemindei that
Kien, tianspaient as his motives may ultimately be, cannot simply be dis-
missed. Like it oi not, he is but an avatai of bioadei cultuial phenomena, a
fact nowheie moie evident than in his awed attempts to salve his discom-
foit in the modein woild with the consolation of tiaditionalist philosophy.
While these two specic philosophical schools have faded fiom the intellec-
tual scene, the potential foi abusing intellectual puisuits as ight fiomsocial
iesponsibility is cleaily veiy much with us still.
Kiens piesciiption of old-fashioned, philologically based Bildung to a
modein woild that seems to be spinning out of contiol in fact places him
in a specic gioup of idealist iespondents to the inteiwai ciisis of cultuie.
Though Kien would be appalled to be associated with a movement deeply
conceined with the iefoimation of secondaiy school cuiiicula, his stiident
espousal of philology as a cultuial cuie-all situates him piecisely theie. The
identication of this gioup, once a pieeminent cultuial foice headed by
Weinei Jagei, will be the initial task of the following chaptei, which has as
its laigei concein the elucidation of the novels iepiesentation of iacial anti-
Semitism.
The Hunchback of Heaven
Anti-Semitism and the Failuie of Humanism
It was of couise the Piatei, which gave iise as well to that monstious guie
Siegfiied Fischeile fiom Autc-da-Fe . . . yes, that hoiiibly doomed attempt at
assimilation undei extieme conditions.
Geiald Stieg
1
Bildung, Assimilation, and the Ciisis of Values
Canettis Jewish guies aie fiankly hideous: lthy, iank, hunchbacked,
undeiclass dwaifs intent upon cheating a blue blood gentile out of a family
inheiitance. Autc-da-Fes piincipal Jew is of couise Siegfiied Fischeile, the
pimp fioma lowbiowViennese pub called The Stais of Heaven (Zumidealen
Himmel ), who stiikes up a conveisation with Petei Kien in the hope of
diumming up business foi his piostitute wife, die Pensicnistin. Needless to
say, Fischeile fails in his eoit to entice Kien, who aftei all could not biing
himself to sleep with Theiese on theii wedding night. In a mannei peifected
by Canetti (both in the novel and the contempoianeous diama Hcchzeit),
Kien and Fischeile conveise at length without evei ieally undeistanding
who the othei is. Failing to giasp the tiue occupation of eithei Fischeile oi
his wife, Kien concludes that the peisecuted little man despeiately aspiies
to the attainment of that highest of Geiman cultuial goods, Bildung, only
to be thwaited at eveiy tuin by his eshly and gieedy wife. In diagnosing
Fischeiles ills as a lack of piopei cultivation, Kien touches upon one of the
most salient cultuial debates of the inteiwai peiiod. If Fischeile pioves im-
peivious to Kiens Bildung-iemedy, it is because, as the veiy embodiment
of viitually eveiy contempoiaiy anti-Semitic steieotype, he is by denition
foibidden that univeisal avenue of human ascent held out by this Enlight-
enment ideal.
.1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm : Io,
In no time at all, Fischeile metamoiphoses in the mind of the piotagonist
into a junioi Kien, and the Pensionistin into anothei Theiese. This disguied
little man becomes the piofessois piotg on teims that aie thus by now
quite familiai. Accoidingly, as the sueiing husband of this duo, Fischeile is
assigned the iole of the Faustian spiiit hindeied in his lofty puisuits by his
venal and concupiscent wife:
He Kien] knew nothing of the iituals of the place, but one thing he iec-
ognized cleailythis stainless spiiit in a wietched body had stiuggled foi
twenty yeais to lift itself out of the miie of its suiioundings . . . Theiese
die Pensicnistin], no less deteimined, diagged himfoi evei back into the
slime . . . He has clutched at one tiny coinei of the woild of the spiiit and
clings to it like a diowning man. Chess is his libiaiy . . . Kien pictuied
to himself the battle this down-tiodden man fought foi his own at. He
takes a book home to iead it secietly, she teais it in pieces and scatteis it
to the winds. She foices him to let hei use his home foi hei unspeakable
puiposes. Possibly she pays a seivant, a spy, to keep the house cleai of
books when she is out. Books aie foibidden, hei own way of life is pei-
mitted . . . She ings open the dooi and with hei clumsy foot kicks ovei
the chessboaid. Mi. Fischeile weeps like a little child. He had just ieached
the most inteiesting pait of his book. He picks up the letteis scatteied
all ovei the ooi and tuins his face away so she shall not iejoice ovei his
teais. He is a little heio. He has chaiactei.
2
Kiens eoits at iecieating Fischeile in his own self-image aie tianspaient.
As in the case of Theiesewho iewoiks the mocking laughtei of the fuini-
tuie stoie employees into dubious piaisewe aie witness heie to an impei-
fect piojection still in piocess. Deteimined to see Fischeile as a puie spiiit
and seekei of tiuth (that is, as a neoplatonist academic like himself ), Kien
supeiimposes the image of a book on the chessboaid so that when Theiese
biutishly oveituins it, Fischeile sciambles to collect scatteied letteis (die
herumliegenden Buchstaben) as he would so many chess pieces. It would be
a gieat mistake to dismiss this passage as meiely the distoiting piojection
of one guie upon anothei, though of couise this is once again the case. In
misieading Fischeile as hungiy foi humanistic Bildung, Kien engages a spe-
cic contioveisy about humanisms piospects as a souice foi Geiman noi-
mative values aftei the gieat defeat in Woild Woild I. Fischeile, as we shall
Io8 : .1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm
see, incainates the failuie of this humanism to tianslate its values into social
policy.
As backgiound to this calamity, I will paint in a fewbioad stiokes a com-
plex stoiy that has been told much moie extensively elsewheie.
3
Though the
Geiman ciisis of valuesthe deep sense of cultuial anxiety occasioned
by the iift between the natuial and social sciences on the one hand and the
humanities (Humanenwissenschaften) on the otheidates back to the last
decades of the nineteenth centuiy, it occupied the postWoild Wai I imagi-
nation with paiticulai intensity.
4
Following Winckelmann in the Enlight-
enment, Geiman intellectuals had widely tuined to Gieece as the font of
noimative cultuial values. Towhat extent couldthis Schilleiianmodel of aes-
thetic education continue to function as a cultuial stabilizei in postwai Gei-
many: Was it possible to tuin to classical philology foi the cultuial mooi-
ings that weie so necessaiy in these tuibulent times: Commenting on the
situation in post-I,I8 Geimany, intellectual histoiian Suzanne Maichand
obseives:
Nevei befoie had the gap between scholaily ieseaich and the cultivation
of the individual seemed so wide, nevei befoie had the Humboldtian aim
of ieconciling the inteiests of both within the Geiman system of highei
education seemed so implausible . . . Duiing and paiticulaily aftei the
wai, this ciitique of scholaiship foi its own sake found a laige and incieas-
ingly diveise ciicle of advocates . . . Ciitics chaiged the scholaily com-
munity of the I,:os with abdicating its iole in establishing social values
and building chaiactei. The scapegoating of specialists foi the soul-
lessness of modein Geiman cultuie went hand in hand with the con-
viction that puie intellectualism would destioy social unityas well as
the integiity of the human chaiactei.
5
Duiing the inteiwai peiiod, theie weie a numbei of attempts to addiess this
ciisis, ianging fiom the amoiphous vitalist movement advocating Lebens-
philcscphie (life philosophy) to the moie sophisticated eoits of philoso-
pheis aimed at ieinstating Kantian philosophy as an anchoi foi cultuial co-
hesion and meaning.
Alluding to Goethes Faust, and no doubt wishing to see himself as a Faus-
tian spiiit stiiving foi tiuth amid Weimai decadence, Kien dubs Fischeile
his Famulus.
6
In oidei to giasp the meaning of this would-be spiiitual
(geistig) appienticeship, we must ist undeistand moie cleaily what Kien,
.1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm : Io,
as a self-styled idealist academic in the thioes of the inteiwai ciisis of values,
stands foi. As we noted in the pievious chaptei, biothei Geoig is the novels
pieeminent caiiiei of neoempiiicist sentiments, Kien his idealist countei-
pait. But just as we dieientiated above between actual empiiicist philoso-
pheis and psychologists (such as William James and Fianz Bientano) and
theii moie questionable epigones, so, too, ought we to dieientiate heie.
Kiens appiopiiation of idealist notions is, as we have noted above, a despei-
ate attempt to hold on to something solid at a time of monumental social,
political, and intellectual upheaval.
The academic gioup with which Kien might moie piecisely be identied,
howevei, is suggested by his specialty as mastei philologist. Foi it was clas-
sical philology, accoiding to Maichand, that came undei ie in the intei-
wai peiiod foi what iefoimeis deciied as its elitism and iiielevance to the
modein woild. Maichand obseives:
Philology had become a metaphoi foi the numbing diudgeiy, authoii-
taiian discipline, pedantic obscuiantism, while classical language tiain-
ing iemained, foi the bulk of the piofessoiiate, the sine qua non of both
Bildung and humanistic Vissenschaft. This combination of declining so-
cial status and the incieasing sense that the Gymnasium alone held back
a cultuie-destioying ood of supeiciality, decadence, and utilitaiian-
ism piepaied the backdiop foi a kind of classicist moiality play, in which
philologists weie saciiced on the altai of modein mateiialism.
7
It is easy to imagine Kien in this lattei iole of saciicial lamb, paiticulaily
since he so willingly poitiays himself and his scholaiship as valiantly and
inveteiately opposed to mass commeicial society. This is, aftei all, how he
ends up standing guaid befoie the Theiesianum in an attempt to inteicept
anyone attempting to pawn books. Befoie one too piecipitously exempts
Kien fiom this context because of his piimaiy inteiest in sinology, it should
be noted that Kien is also a classical and biblical philologist, as his giandi-
ose plan to wiite the nal exegesis of the New Testament illustiates. Indeed
Kiens specialty as an Oiientalist may above all signify the veiy pedantic
obscuiantism Maichand notes above.
Today it may seem cuiious indeed to suggest that one would tuin to the
humanities foi a consensus on cultuial and social values. We aie in oui own
timeand peihaps paiticulaily in Fiance and the United Statesmoie ac-
customed to viewing these disciplines as a theatei of contention iathei than
IIo : .1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm
a wellspiing of cohesive and binding noims. Yet in what is peihaps the last
gieat attempt at a Geiman cultuial synthesis, the so-called Thiid Human-
ism of the inteiwai peiiod, Weinei Jagei attempted piecisely this: to anchoi
postwai politics (bioadly conceived) in what he held to be the secuie foun-
dations of classical philology. The goal, as Maichand explains, was to iejoin
Vissenschaft to Bildung, histoiical ieseaich to the geneiation of values, and
modein iootless Geimans to the seiene and moially supeiioi Gieeks, a new
Geiman Golden Age, a Thiid Humanism, might commence in the shadow
of militaiy defeat and political chaos.
8
While Kiens piactice of desiccating
scholaiship iepiesents exactly that which Jagei wanted to oveicome, Kien
also iegisteis those veiy scientic challenges with which Jageis ambitious
piogiam was ill equipped to contend. Kiens consciousness of the millions
of atoms iacing aiound in what in the good old days appeaied to be a quite
stable piece of text signies, as we noted above, a scientic modeinity of
which the piotagonist is only dimly awaie. Pausing long enough only to ex-
piess his anxieties, the old-fashioned philologist ieminds the ieadei how
utteily incongiuous modein science had become foi the tiaditional scholai.
Refiacted thiough Kiens paitial undeistanding and palpable tiepidation aie
some of the most ievolutionaiy bieakthioughs of the eaily twentieth cen-
tuiy science: the theoiy of ielativity, quantum mechanics, and the Heisen-
beig unceitainty piinciple. In this context, Kiens embiace of a pseudo neo-
Kantianismto the extent even that he mimics the daily habits of Immanuel
Kantand his unconvincing espousal of neoidealist piinciples cleaily signi-
es a questionable ietieat, iathei than a new cultuial synthesis. Ultimately,
Jageis vaunted Thiid Humanism, which set out to salvage Kiens discipline
and place it at the centei of the new Geiman iepublic as the piovidei of
cultuial noims, foundeied on its inability to contest vulgai, exclusionaiy
denitions of Geimanness,
9
failed, in othei woids, in ioughly the same way
Kien would.
It is against this backgiound that Kiens oei to elevate the handicapped
Jew via high cultuie needs to be seen. If Fischeiles wife tiansmogiies in
Kiens jaundiced eyes into a second Theiese, it is neveitheless tiue that
Fischeile himself becomes foi the ieadei a kind of second Theiese insofai as
he is destined to fulll the iole Kien had once assigned to his biide: junioi
libiaiian. Foi Theiese, too, Kien had once held out the hope that, illiteiate
as she was, the sheei pioximity to such a magnicent libiaiy and, of couise,
to himself, might iaise hei to a highei level of humanity. Yet because she is
.1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm : III
a woman, Kien is nevei so sanguine about Theieses piospects foi Bildung
as he is about Fischeiles.
Fiom the veiy beginning, Kien woiiies about his ability to keep up his
end of the Bildung-baigain: He feaied coming into collision with the little
fellows thiist foi education. He might iepioach him, with appaient justi-
cation, foi letting his books lie fallow. How was he to defend himself :
10
Shoitly theieaftei, the naiiatoiinltiated again by Kienwoiiies that
thiough daily contact with so vast a quantity of leaining the little mans
hungei foi it would giow gieatei and gieatei, suddenly he would be caught
secieting a book and tiying to iead it . . . He would have to be piepaied
foi it oially.
11
These piactical matteis of piopei pedagogy notwithstanding,
Kien nevei doubts the equation of Bildung with humanity: If it weie pos-
sible to infuse these like-minded cieatuies] with a little education, a little
humanity, this would ceitainly be an achievement.
12
Of couise this bias cuts
both ways: those with little oi no leaining (such as Theiese) aie by the same
standaid judged to be subhuman.
When Fischeile feigns deep concein foi his employeis Kcpfbiblicthek
the phantom counteipait to the libiaiy Kien was foiced by Theiese to va-
catethe self-styled Piivatgelehitei (a teim meaning piivate intellec-
tual without an ocial academic post, but iionically emblematic of the
piotagonists noted asocial inwaidness) can only assume that the dwaif s
education is pioceeding just as he had expected. In fact, he seems to ac-
quiie cultivation viitually by osmosis: Undei the piessuie of the books,
which he did not even iead, the dwaif was changing befoie his veiy eyes.
Kiens old theoiy was ieceiving notable conimation.
13
Of couise, noth-
ing could be fuithei fiom the tiuth. The entiie novel is stiuctuied by the
comic piinciple of incongiuity, and this is no exception: Fischeile is meiely
playing along with Kien in oidei moie systematically to iob him of the bal-
ance of his inheiitance. Yet the fact that Fischeile fails to take seiiously his
own Bildung does not at all detiact fiom the fact that Kiens iepeated and
lofty claims iegaiding the tiansfoimatoiy powei of leaininghypociitical
though they may well bedene the sociocultuial agenda foi the ieadei.
Though he lacks the self-awaieness and sophistication of Schnitzleis Prc-
fesscr Bernhardi (I,I:), Fischeile neveitheless seives to diaw oui attention
to the conict between the iising tide of iacist nationalism on the one hand,
and the cosmopolitan coie of Kantian humanism that was being ievived
in vaiious hues in oidei to shoie up Geiman identity aftei the Fiist Woild
II: : .1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm
Wai, on the othei. Comically unawaie of this laigei cultuial nexus, Fischeile
neveitheless poses the seiious question about Jewish assimilation by means
of Geiman Kultur.
In the inteiwai peiiod Jewish assimilation as well as the incieasing oppo-
sition to it weie buining issues. In I,:: Kail Kiaus ieissued his I,I_ essay Er
ist dcch e }ud, in which the mastei satiiist ieiteiated his faith in assimila-
tion thiough Bildung. He tiied to deal with the claim that he was Jewish,
wiites Steven Bellei in Vienna and the }ews, :8o,:;,8, by demonstiating
that he possessed none of the supposedly Jewish qualities. The woild of Geist
in which he lived, he continued, had no ioom foi iace oi iacial chaiacteiis-
tics. He did not even know what Jewish chaiacteiistics weie. Neveitheless,
he demonstiated to his own satisfaction that he had none . . . In othei woids
Kiaus was saying that the Jews who lived in the woild of Geist could avoid
the pioblem of judische Eigenschaften . . . by not having any, foi they weie
iiielevant in that woild.
14
But Kiauss claim, especially by I,::, was moie
a despeiate aigument foi the way he wished things weie than a ieection
of contempoianeous ieality. Kiauss continuation and iadicalization of the
Enlightenment ideal of puie humanity,
15
no less than Kiens own phony es-
pousal of these ideals, point to a libeial tiadition alieady long undei siege
by, foi example, the open anti-Semitism of the Austiian Chiistian Socialists
led by the notoiiously anti-Semitic mayoi of Vienna, Kail Luegei.
What people like Kiaus, Theodoi Gompeiz, and Heimann Cohen (the
lattei in his iole as one of the foundeis of the neo-Kantian school) weie
hoping to aiticulate in the postWoild Wai I eia was thus not meiely a gen-
eral iesponse to the laigei ciisis of values, but, moie paiticulaily, a iesponse
to the challenge to theii identity as Geiman Jews.
16
Theii tenacious loyalty
to the Geiman philosophical tiadition since Kant can in laige pait be ex-
plained, Bellei aigues, because the tenets of Geiman idealismcontained the
one vital pieiequisite to assimilationist theoiy, the autonomy of the will.
17
Indeed, foi humanists of the Aufklarung, Jews oeied a test case of the e-
cacy of Bildung. The sheei iadical natuie of the tiansfoimation needed to
cieate a human being fiom an oiiental such as the Jew would be pioof of
educations powei in cieating a puiei human, the new types of humanity
which would foim the iational society of the futuie.
18
.1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm : II_
Fischeile as Mascot foi Racial Anti-Semitism
This society of the futuie, howevei, boie little iesemblance eithei to
the Weimai Republic oi the Fiist Austiian Republic. Indeed the iise of
iacial anti-Semitism, which had its ioots in the latei nineteenth centuiy but
achieved paiticulai viiulence in the postWoild Wai I peiiod, contested
piecisely that one vital pieiequisite to assimilationist theoiy, the autono-
mous will of each human being. In Autc-da-Fe the diminished oppoitunity
foi assimilation is iepiesented less in the plotit is ceitainly not a mattei of
a Jews thwaited attempt to join Geiman cultuiebut in the veiy chaiac-
teiization of the novels piincipal Jew, Siegfiied Fischeile. Without a doubt
Fischeile woiiies about being iecognized and tieated as a Jew, and he is in
fact snubbed by a waitei in The Stais of Heaven because of his Jewishness.
Yet, as in the case of Theiese, it is vital to note that Fischeile enteis the nai-
iationthat is, even befoie he becomes the object of piejudice and abuse at
the level of plotas a veiitable stockpile of contempoianeous anti-Semitic
steieotypes. Chief among these, as we shall see, aie the physical attiibutes
that maik him as a Jew. This is how we ist encountei him:
Suddenlya vast humpappeaiedclose tohimandasked, couldhe sit theie:
Kien looked down xedly. Wheie was the mouth out of which speech had
issued: And alieady the ownei of the hump, a dwaif, hopped up on to a
chaii . . . The tip of his stiongly hooked nose lay in the depth of his chin.
His mouth was as small as himselfonly it wasnt to be found. No foie-
head, no eais, no neck, no buttocksthe man consisted of a hump, an
immense nose and two black, calm, sad eyes . . . Suddenly Kien] heaid
a hoaise voice undeineath the table: Hows business:
19
Needless to say, this desciiption compiises a veiitable catalogue of contem-
poiaiy anti-Jewish clichs, the best known being the laige-nosed Jew, which
is ieiteiated tiielessly thioughout Book : of the novel. This coaise and stii-
dent use of steieotypical chaiacteiistics seems to have cowed some ciitics,
who appeai moie disposed to view Fischeile as just one moie in a seiies of a
self-absoibed chaiacteis unable to communicate meaningfully with his fel-
low human beings. Yet it would be a mistake to mue the novels ciitique
by geneializing Fischeile in this mannei.
In hei I,,I study Die Figurenkcnstellaticn in Elias Canettis Autc-da-Fe,
Jutta Paal has suggested that Fischeiles Jewish identity need not detain us
II : .1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm
at all: Except foi the consumptive waitei no one at the Stais of Heaven
is botheied by his heiitage. Theiefoie it would be mistaken to attiibute too
much meaning to the ieligious peisuasion of this guie.
20
Yet the mannei
in which Paal iefeis to Fischeiles Jewishness is awed fiom the veiy out-
set. Foi the kind of iacial anti-Semitism this guie is made to iepiesent has
little to do with the euphemizing teim heiitage (Herkunft) and nothing
to do with ieligion. Iionically, if Paal ieally means ieligious confession
(Religicnszugehcrigkeit), hei asseition would be coiiect, foi Fischeile has no
connection whatsoevei to Judaism as ieligious faith. Instead, this phiase
and similai ones appeai elsewheie in the ciiticismfunctions meiely as an
evasive suiiogate foi the veiy Jewish identity that has become so pioblem-
atic. Indeed, this eageiness to dismiss the issue oveilooks Kiens own ini-
tial aveision to Fischeiles Jewishness. Shoitly aftei the intioductoiy pas-
sage on Fischeile, we iead that Kien consideied the all-peivading nose of
the manikin, it inspiied him with mistiust.
21
A little latei Fischeile inten-
tionally diops the woid Jewish while attempting to defiaud Kien of some
funds: Fischeile made a minute pause in oidei to obseive the eect of the
woid Jewish on his companion. You nevei can tell. The woild is ciawling
with anti-semites. A Jew always has to be on guaid against deadly enemies.
Hump-backed dwaifs and otheis, who have neveitheless managed to iise
to the iank of pimp, cannot be too caieful. The swallowing did not escape
him. He inteipieted it as embaiiassment, and fiom that moment decided
that Kien must be a Jew, which he ceitainly was not.
22
Heie Fischeile iegis-
teis a stieet-smait awaieness of peivasive anti-Semitism, even if this shaip
obseivei (scharfer Becbachter) completely misconstiues Kiens body lan-
guage at the same time. As we alieady know, Kien is able to put aside the
iepugnance he feels inthe companyof Fischeile andsee his ownpuie spiiit
ieectedalbeit somewhat moie dimlyin the disguied dwaif. But if Paal
is iight in that the cential guies do not themselves actively cast anti-Semitic
aspeisions upon Fischeile, this appaiently does little to allay the Jews own
acute awaieness of widespiead anti-Semitism. It occuis to him, foi example,
that it would be paiticulaily inadvisable to diaw attention to himself in a
chuich: He foigot he was in chuich. He was usually iespectful and cautious
in chuiches, foi by his nose he was veiy obviously maiked.
23
A little latei
Fischeile whisks Kien o a busy Viennese stieet into a chuich, and a similai
feai iecuis: Fischeile was caught o his guaid, in a chuich he felt uncei-
tain of himself. He almost pushed Kien out again into the squaie . . . Let the
.1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm : II,
chuich collapse, he was not going to iun into the aims of the police! Fischeile
knew teiiible stoiies of Jews buiied in the wieckage of falling chuiches be-
cause they had no business to be theie. His wife the Capitalist had told them
to himbecause she was devout and wanted to conveit himto hei faith.
24
Yet
it is not only this type of supeistitious anti-Semitism iegisteied by Fischeile
himself, but also the pationizing philosemitism of the piopiietiess of The
Baboon (Zum Pavian), which keeps oui focus on the chaiacteis Jewish-
ness thioughout.
The question that has been assiduously swept undei the iug in the dis-
cussion of Autc-da-Fe is, Whose anti-Semitismis it: Just as we weie iequiied
to confiont the misogyny evident in the naiiative constiuction of Theiese,
so, too, must we ask about the anti-Semitism inheient in Fischeiles veiy
chaiacteiization. Recall that his veiy ist woids aie Hows business: (Vie
gehn die Geschafte?). Though he is fai fiom singulai in his avaiice, he is
the pieeminent entiepieneui in the novel, and, of couise, a swindlei pai
excellence, not to mention a systematic exploitei of the gentile woikeis in
the Fiima S. Fischei. It seems only natuial to him to iefei to investment
funds as Jewish capital (das judische Kapital ), which he does iepeatedly.
25
Fuitheimoie, though no one chaiactei is paiticulaily attiactive in this novel,
Fischeile alone (with the necessaiy exception of his look-alike accomplice,
die Fischerin) is consistently desciibed as an animal, outtted with simian
aims (lang wie die eines Gibbcn) and a cioaking voice (er krachzte), who
snis out (wittert) both money and dangei and, like some tiained ciicus
animal, even gatheis up cash with his tongue.
26
The mattei is peihaps complicated by the fact that the novels gieatest
anti-Semite is Fischeile himself. He sees Jews as essentially ciiminal, and
when Kien tiies to ie him, he ietoits: Giateful, aient you! You Jewish
swine! . . . You cant expect bettei fiom a Jew swine!
27
Still undei the im-
piession that Kien is himself a Jew, Fischeile ieiteiates the epithets he has
piesumably heaid in abundance diiected at himself. Above all, Fischeile is
foievei diessing down imaginaiy chess opponents who aie none othei than
piojections of his own Jewish self. Aftei one such matchFischeile is lit-
eially addiessing his miiioi imagehe dispatches his opponent with these
woids: At home in Euiope we call this galloping chess! Go begging with
that nose!
28
Aie we entitled to dismiss all this by claiming, howevei inciedibly, that
Canetti was oblivious to contempoiaiy anti-Semitism:
29
An alteinate,
Figure . Der kleine Cchn (Little Cchn). Fischerles cultural prctctype in a Vcrld Var Iera pcstcard.
.1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm : II,
though equally insucient, way of accounting foi this discouise is to suggest
that it is meiely an expiession of Canettis own Jewish self-loathing.
30
These
opposing explanations shaie a common stiategy of subsuming the anti-
Semitic discouise undei debatable questions of biogiaphy, and thus distiact
us fiomFischeiles iconic iole as the giotesque amalgamof almost eveiycon-
tempoianeous anti-Semitic steieotype.
31
Looking back to the ist half of the
centuiy, it is not haid at all to nd anti-Jewish caiicatuies stiikingly similai
to Fischeile himself. Figuie , foi example, gives us Der kleine Cchn (Little
Cohn), a Jewish dwaif whose physical defoimity disqualies him fiom mili-
taiy seivice. Sandei Gilman obseives that the ill-foimed little Mi. Kohn
was] the eponymous Jew in Geiman caiicatuies of the peiiod, a kind of
anti-Semitic mascot of Wilhelmine cultuie.
32
The alleged Jewish physique exhibited in Little Mi. Cohn[Fischeile is not
at all new in the long histoiy of anti-Semitism, but iacialoi bettei, coipo-
iealanti-Semitism was on the iise in the eaily pait of the twentieth cen-
tuiy and gains infamous piominence in Geimany and Austiia duiing the
inteiwai peiiod,
33
a development cleaily in evidence in the famous caii-
catuies of the peiiod. Though not eveiy Jew is necessaiily iepiesented as
quite so small as Der kleine Cchn, most aie indeed stunted, bowed ovei, and
egiegiously malfoimed.
34
Fuitheimoie, a piepondeiance of contempoiaiy
anti-Semitic caiicatuie shows Jews to have notoiiously bad postuie, a tiait
that in Fischeile ieceives its hypeibolic expiession in the foim of the gieat
hunchback.
35
Using the language of philology, which as we noted was at this
time chaiged in a paiticulai way with piopagating the veiy Enlightenment
values that should have libeiated Fischeile fiom his entiapment in anti-
Semitic steieotypes, Kien iationalizes Fischeiles impiisonment in a cuised
genealogy. Refeiiing heie to the Capitalists peisecution of pooi Fischeile,
Kien notes that hei destiuctive activity . . . was diiected at the man oppo-
site, whom natuie by means of a dismal etymology had, at any iate alieady
made a ciipple.
36
Just piioi to this episode, Kien tellingly iemaiks, in ie-
sponse to Fischeiles cuiious explication of the teim Stipendium as Jew-
ish capital:
37
By theii etymology shall ye know them.
38
It is woith noting
that Kien has in fact ieveised the enlightenment foimula foi assimilation:
wheieas once paiticulaiity was to be absoibed in univeisal human potential,
heie the philologist employs the tools of his tiade to explain away the Jews
physical abnoimality. He speaks like a Jew, Kien ieasons, so it makes sense
II8 : .1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm
that he looks like the quintessential Jew, natuie, sanctied by the nomen-
clatuie of high cultuial Bildung, has made him thus. Cleaily, the suggestion
that etymology, that cential tiope of philology, could be used to iationalize
and natuialize Fischeiles fate as a Jewish ciipple is deeply iionic in light of
the cential cultuial mission attiibuted to philology duiing the Weimai eia.
Hunched ovei, often bow-legged, fiequently shoit, and almost univei-
sally supplied with a giotesque, oveisize nosethese chaiacteiistics coiie-
spond to a tee with those assigned to Fischeile, and laigely make up the
physical chaimhe holds foi the madamof The Baboon, the whoiehouse cum
cafe wheie Fischeile piocuies his bogus passpoit: The landlady embiaced
Fischeiles hump. She oveiwhelmed him with woids of aection, shed been
longing to see him, longing foi his queei little nose, his ciooked little legs,
shed longed foi his dailing, dailing chessboaid.
39
Neithei the visual noi the naiiative clichs aie by any means coincidental,
on the contiaiy, they ieect the specic doctiines of an incieasingly wide-
spiead iacial anti-Semitism. Gilman iepoits that physical degeneiation was
a scientically accepted fact of Jewish life at this time, the only debated ques-
tion was whethei such defoimity was attiibutable to genetics oi to a bane-
ful enviionment, such as the Jewish ghetto.
40
Within the ctional woild of
Autc-da-Fe it is theiefoie not suipiising that the biawny Benedikt Pfa ihe-
toiically suggests that he is becoming a Jew just as he begins to feai that
he is being peiceived as a physical weakling.
41
Foi, as Gilman notes, Geiman
medical handbooks fiom the ist half of this centuiy aie iife with asseitions
about the innate feebleness of the Jewish body.
42
Siegfiied
Canettis ciitique in Autc-da-Fe of coipoieal anti-Semitism takes what is
at this point in this study a familiai foim: hypeibole. As in the case of tiadi-
tional misogynistic steieotypes, Canetti iecoids putatively Jewish physical
attiibutes and explodes them by means of giotesque exaggeiation: the pooi
postuie becomes an outiageously piominent hunchback, the laige nose be-
comes this total nose (diese ausschlieliche Nase). But that is not all. Built
into Fischeiles chaiacteiization is anothei aspect of contempoianeous Jew-
ish life, a tiace of assimilationist stiiving of which Fischeile himself is haidly
conscious: his name.
.1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm : II,
Befoie pioceeding it may be helpful to iecall that in Autc-da-Fe the chai-
acteis do not develop in any Aiistotelian sense: theii possibilitieslike
those of musical instiumentsaie piegiven, and the plot is theiefoie a meie
playing out of piedictable (and often quite meagei) potentialities.
43
This is
woith keeping in mind when ieecting on the signicance of Fischeiles
ist name: Siegfiied. Foi this is not to be seen as ievelatoiy of Fischeiles
innei stiivingCanettis guies donot at any iate have anydisceinible innei
life
44
but as a signiei of a social and cultuial event that stands in paiodic
contiast to the actual caieei of Fischeile: namely, successful Jewish assimi-
lation to Geiman cultuie.
If Canetti meant meiely to iepeat the negative steieotypes, he might have
given Fischeile one of the moie common epithets fiom the abundant stock
of anti-Semitic nomenclatuie: Isiael, Jacob, oi Itzig.
45
But instead he chose
Siegfiied, the quintessentially Geimanic name fiom that quintessentially
Geimanic epic, Das Nibelungenlied. What today may seem a quaint sub-
tlety (oi, indeed, a meie detail) was in fact a mattei of no small impoit at
the beginning of the centuiy.
46
Duiing the Wilhelmine peiiod, Ruth Gay
iepoits, Siegfiied became one of the most populai names among Jewish
boys, a fact she explains as a diiect expiession of Jewish veneiation of Gei-
man cultuie: To the Geiman Jews Bildung iepiesented a new kind of intel-
lectual and emotional home aftei the physical connes of the ghetto and the
closed scholaily woild of Jewish leaining.
47
Which illuminates, peihaps,
why the infamous piotagonist of Oskai Panizzas Operated }ew (I8,_), Itzig
Faitel Stein, ciowns his giotesque seiies of eoits to iemake himself into
an Aiyan look-alike with the new name Siegfiied Fieudenstein.
48
Both
as a magnet foi viitually eveiy anti-Semitic steieotype and in his deteimi-
nation to iecieate himself physically, this Itzig[Siegfiied is iichly ieminis-
cent of Canettis latei Fischeilea connectionencouiagedinsofai as Panizza
was championed in the Weimai peiiod by both Kuit Tucholsky and Waltei
Benjamin.
49
Yet if the Jewish piedilection foi the Geimanic name Siegfiied once sig-
nied a condence in Geiman cultuie as a home foi Jewsan asseition
Panizza puts in question alieady at the tuin of the centuiythis cleaily no
longei applies to Fischeile, who can envision a futuie foi himself only by
means of escape, not assimilation. Though he does not aspiie to authentic
Bildung, Fischeiles name (as well, of couise, as his association with Kien)
invites us to iemembei a not-too-distant time when allegiance to Geiman
I:o : .1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm
cultuie piovided an enti, a venue foi shedding the paiticulaiist gaib of
Judaism. In a masteiful stioke of naming, Canetti has captuied the contia-
dictions of postWoild Wai I Geiman cultuie: Siegfiied, the signiei of
successful assimilation, coupled with Fischeile, a designation of indelible
ethnicity that simply could not be escaped.
50
If Jews at this time weie incieasingly dened in teims of genetic and
physical featuies, so, too, weie Geimans. The slouching, limping guie of
Isiael was, in the populai imagination, contiasted with the idealized Gei-
man body of Siegfiied. Blond Siegfiied types, foi example, became the
physicalif secietideal of the Jewish foieign ministei Walthei Rathenau,
even while he accepted many featuies of the anti-Semites caiicatuie of the
Jew.
51
Indeed, in the Wilhelmine and Weimai peiiods theie would have
been an inescapable association with Richaid Wagneis immensely populai
Siegfried, whose title guie did much to piopagate the image of the noidic
man as the quintessential Geiman.
52
Einst Hanisch, who has investigated The Political Inuence and Appio-
piiation of Wagnei, points out that duiing the Fiist Woild Wai Siegfried
came to be identied with the essence of Geimanness, the woild wai was
seen as the Gctterdammerung of the West.
53
Hanisch goes on to explain that
duiing the Fiist Woild Wai, inevitably, the famous sentence fiomWagneis
German Art and German Pclitics is invoked, to the eect that to be Gei-
man means to do something foi its own sake, a sentiment that had acquiied
an almost saciosanct status in nationalist ciicles. Siegfiied, symbol of vic-
toiy (Sieg) and peace (Fried), appeais as the poetic exemplication of this
thought, wheieas Mime, the symbol of all that is un-Geiman, of the enemy
poweis, is motivated only by consideiations of egoistic utility and self intei-
est.
54
Shoitly aftei the outbieak of the Fiist Woild Wai, Wagneis son-in-
law Houston Stewait Chambeilain identied Wilhelm II as the ages new
Siegfiied, authoiized to upioot all that is un-Geiman and lead the battle
against the coiioding poison of Judaism. Opposed to this diabolical iace
Chambeilain wiote to the Kaisei, stands Geimany as divine champion:
Siegfiied veisus the woim.
55
Given the widespiead cultuial iesonances of
Wagneis opeia in this peiiod, it may be instiuctive to view the novel in this
light.
56
Fischeiles physical desciiption in itself suggests the connection, foi while
he may be named foi the handsome and poweiful heio (of both the Gei-
manic saga and the Wagnei opeias), he is cleaily diawn moie to the speci-
Figure ,. This rcugh draft fcr an anti-Semitic cartccn by }csef Plank ccunterpcses
a judge frcm Kiens sccial class with a stccped-cver, malcdcrcus }ew whc cculd
have been drawn frcm the pages cf Auto-da-F. Similarly repulsed by Fischerles
lth and defcrmity, Kien nevertheless senses in this misshapen dwarf the hunger
fcr transfcrmative Kultui. Library cf Ccngress, phctc ccurtesy United States
Hclccaust Memcrial Museum Phctc Archives.
Figure o. Diese ausschlieliche Nase (This tctal ncse). Twc cf Fischerles cardinal
attributes are reected in this cartccn frcm the anti-Semitic Viennese magazine
Kikeiiki. These }ewish drcnes are marked mcst cbvicusly by a grctesquely
cversized ncse, but are characterized nc less by their parasitic practice (as the
German capticn instructs) cf explciting the wcrker beesechcing Fischerles abuse
cf his gentile emplcyees in the Firma S. Fischer. United States Hclccaust
Memcrial Museum Phctc Archives.
.1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm : I:_
Figure ,. This page frcm the :;,o anti-Semitic childrens bcck Tiau keinem Fuchs
auf giunei Heid, und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid prcvides a stark visual ccntrast
between idealized Aryan masculinity and the putatively physically degenerate
}ew. The acccmpanying pcems teach schcclchildren the fcllcwing lesscns. The
German is a prcud man, whc can wcrk and ght. Because he is sc handscme and
full cf ccurage, the }ew bears him an ancient grudge. This is the }ew, cne sees that
immediatelythe biggest sccundrel in all the land. He thinks he is the handscmest
cf all, and all the while is sc ugly. United States Hclccaust Memcrial Museum
Phctc Archives.
cations of the hideous dwaif Mime. Eaily on, the young Wagneiian Siegfiied
infoims his suiiogate fathei that he nds him physically iepulsive:
I am iepelled
by the sight of you,
I see that youie evil
in all that you do.
I: : .1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm
I watch you stand,
shue and nod,
shiinking and slinking,
with youi eyelids blinking
by youi nodding neck
Id like to catch you,
and end youi shiinking,
and stop youi blinking!
So deeply, Mime, I loathe you. . .
Eveiything to me
is deaiei than you: biids in the bianches
and sh in the biook
all aie deaiei to me,
fai moie than you.
57
Physical polaiity, expiessed in teims of iacial physical attiibutes that con-
tempoianeously dened Geimans and Jews, is the ciux of Siegfiieds bieak
with Mime. The telltale signs aie familiai to us fiom Canettis desciiption
of Fischeile: an awkwaid, almost animal gait combined with a giasping,
piobing visage. When the young heio iecognizes the incongiuity of his own
Aiyan beauty with the unpleasant appeaiance of his putative fathei, he be-
gins to question his tiue paientage. He leains the tiuth while gazing at his
own splendidly Geimanic image ieected in the wateis of a pond:
And theie in the stieam
I saw my face
it wasnt like youis,
not in the least,
no moie than a toad
iesembles a sh.
No sh had a toad foi a fathei!
58
Mime, cleaily the toad (Krcte) in this dichotomy, is foiced to admit that he
is no blood ielation: Youie no kin to me.
59
Undei gieat duiess, he vouch-
safes the stoiy of his chaiges naming, suggesting a nominalist causality (oi
pioleptic etymology) that issues foith in physical beauty:
The wish of youi mothei
thats what she told me:
.1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm : I:,
as Siegfiied you would giow
stiong and faii.
60
Moieovei, Mimes ieputationpaiticulaily in Wagneiian ciiclesas es-
sentially gieedy, mateiialistic, tieacheious, andtheiefoie un-Geiman only
stiengthens the connectionbetweenhimandFischeile. Like Mime, Fischeile
attempts to deceive and iob his mastei while he sleeps, but unlike his Wag-
neiian double, Fischeile contemplates muidei only to dismiss it as an im-
possibility foi a Jew. Maic Weinei goes fuithei to aigue that Wagnei diei-
entiates Siegfiied fiom Mimeboth tenoisby assigning them distinctive
voices that connote, iespectively, a healthy, manly Geimanness and a de-
giaded, eeminate Jewishness: Mimes] elevated tessituia, contiasted with
the lowei vocal wiiting foi Siegfiied, gives him away to Wagneis contem-
poiaiy audience schooled in a cultuie that undeistood the Jewish voice to
be high, nasal, and dieient.
61
Peihaps Mime (oi, foi that mattei, Albeiich)
is not essentially an anti-Semitic guie in the sense that latei audiences
in dieient cultuial settings would easily iecognize. Yet, given the bioadei
semiotic economy of the Weimai peiiod, he is eminently amenable to this
inteipietation, and in fact functions in this mannei as an inteitext to Autc-
da-Fe.
62
The decisive factoi in establishing this inteitextual ielationship may
be the fate Mime and Fischeile shaie: both die by the swoid because of theii
iiiepiessible venality: If I fail to kill you, Mime asks Siegfiied, how can I
be suie of my tieasuie:
63
But Siegfiied, of couise, pievails. Taste then my
swoid, [ iepulsive babblei! he ciies and afteiwaids giabs Mimes coipse,
diags it to the knoll at the entiance to the cave, and thiows it down inside.
64
Undeiscoiing the highei piinciple at stake in this execution, Siegfiied apos-
tiophizes the now deceased Mime:
In the cavein theie,
lie with the hoaid!
You schemed so long
and stiove foi gold,
so now take youi joy in that tieasuie!
65
Fischeile meets his end somewhat less opeiatically: he is dismembeied with
a biead knife and then shoved undei a bed. Yet the justication foi muidei-
ing the disguied dwaif is essentially the same: as ietaliation foi betiaying
his foimei employee foi lucie. And, like Siegfiied, this executionei tuins (oi
I:o : .1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm
Figure 8. Fritz Langs :;: Siegfiied pcwerfully reiterates the Aryan ideal
cf Germanic masculinity as unattainable by hidecus misshapen dwarfs like
Fischerledespite the assimilaticnist aspiraticns ircnically enccded in his rst
name, Siegfried. The lms intertitle reads. He is wcndrcus fair, a ccmmentary
that hardly seems necessary in light cf the stark visual ccntrasts in this scene.
Museum cf Mcdern Art/Film Stills Archive.
ietuins) to amoious puisuits, once this venal little antagonist is thus dis-
patched.
Wagnei was still a favoiite in the inteiwai peiiod, paiticulaily of Vien-
nese Jews. Fuithei, Fiitz Langs Weimai-eia lming of the Nibelung saga can
only have ciiculated the stoiy to even widei audiences. Langs I,: Siegfried
infact undeiscoies poweifully the iconic physical polaiities desciibedabove.
Theie is theiefoie little doubt that Siegfried would have echoed meaningfully
within the ctional chambeis of Autc-da-Fe. But in consideiing the specic
meaning of this inteitext, we should not foiget that the novels iionyand,
.1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm : I:,
thus, the ciitical vantage pointiesides in the fact that Fischeile is neithei
Mime noi Siegfiied, but both. Oi, bettei, he is a Mime whc wculd be Sieg-
fried, a Jew who would like to be fieed of his physical maikeis, but, within
the stiictuies of coipoieal iacism, can only dieam of such fieedom. Beai-
ing the name Siegfiied thus incainates one of the novels bittei iionies that
ieveibeiates with widei cultuial signicance.
All of this may elucidate the dilemma piesent in the veiy exposition of
one Siegfried Fischerle, an ostensibly simple chaiactei in whom a complex
unit of Weimai-eia cultuie is encoded. If, on the one hand, Fischeile ieects
the tiuth of what Petei Gay calls the gieatly impeiiled piospects foi Jewish
assimilation aftei the Fiist Woild Wai, this dwaif also suggests by his veiy
being that the intia-Jewish debates of the eia weie tiagically quite moot.
While no novellet alone a modeinist novelcan evei quantify the social
and cultuial issues it may engage, we aie neveitheless left to wondei about
the signicance of those contioveisies between the assimilated Westein Jews
and the Oithodox Jews of the East, oi the debates between the Zionists and
the accultuiated Austio-Geiman Jews in the face of implacable iacial anti-
Semitism.
66
Foi such anti-Semites, aftei all, a Jew was a Jew was a Jew. The
cultuial loyalties, political aspiiations, oi ieligious beliefs of the individual
Jew matteied not at all.
67
Inescapably Jewish
Despite Canettis noted aveision to concepts of diamatic development,
Autc-da-Fe does contain some naiiative piogiession. In fact, of all the pai-
allel plots that compiise the novel, Fischeiles is peihaps the most tiadition-
ally lineai. In addition to the constiaints of his unavoidably Jewish body,
Fischeile appaiently also lacks the intelligence to qualify foi Kiens spuiious
Bildung piogiam (he mistakes Plato, foi example, foi a wealthy mogul),
68
and is theiefoie pievented on this count as well fiom aspiiing to tiaditional
assimilation. Instead, Fischeile fosteis a fantasy of escape to Ameiica, which
he plans to nance by methodically iobbing Kien.
Because he has inteinalized the malicious physiognomic piemises of the
coipoieal anti-Semites, Fischeile believes that fieedommeans fieedomfiom
his Jewish body. His self-hatied takes daikly comical tuins, as when he
beats himself foi stealing Kiens wallet, and expiesses itself in a disaimingly
I:8 : .1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm
stiaightfoiwaid mannei: He had no aiticles of faith, oi onlyonethat Jew
is a genus of ciiminal which caiiies its punishment with it.
69
Canetti oeis
up this bittei satiie at a time when, by all accounts, ieal-woild Jewish self-
hatied had nevei befoie been so viiulent.
70
Ceitainly the phenomenon was
of gieat enough signicance to waiiant a contioveisial study by Theodoi
Lessing, whose I,_o title Der judische Selbstha (Jewish Self-Hatied) actually
coined the teim.
71
Chaiacteiistically, Canetti takes a complex social phenomenon and ie-
duces it to its coie absuidity. Foi Fischeile this means the puisuit of two
somewhat inconsistent, though oddly compatible, goals: iemoving the phy-
sical maikeis of Jewishness fiomhis body, and eeing to a countiy wheie his
Jewishness will not count so much against him. Ameiica is the place wheie
Fischeile sets his fantasy about stiiking it iich both by winning big at chess
and by maiiying a blond heiiess, a soit of Hoiatio Algei myth minus the
woik ethic. But Fischeile woiiies, in one of the eailiei installments of this
ieiteiated fantasy, about being tieated as an outsidei even in this land of out-
sideis. In imagining his own Ameiican success stoiy, he nds it necessaiy
to confiont anti-Jewish steieotypes: Let themsay Jews aie cowaids. The ie-
poiteis ask him who he is. Not a soul knows him. He doesnt look like an
Ameiican. Theie aie Jews eveiywheie. But wheie does this Jew come fiom,
whos iolled in tiiumph ovei Capablanca:
72
Ameiica neveitheless holds
out the oei of bettei times, it is a place, Fischeile imagines, wheie hotels
oei clean sheets even to Jews, and wheie a big, beautiful, blue-eyed Mae
Westtype blond can fall foi a little guy with an extiaoidinaiily long nose:
Dailing! said the millionaiiess and pinched it, she loved long noses, she
couldnt stand shoit ones.
73
This dieam biide seems in fact to be an ideal-
ized veision of the philosemitic piopiietiess of the pub The Baboon, who
expiesses a similai weakness foi Fischeiles special nose.
74
These fantasies aside, Fischeile is gieatly conceined that his body will
give him away. Eaily on he consideis suigeiy to iepaii his back, but has no
way to nance it. Geoig actually ist enteis the naiiative in this connection:
Fischeile deteimines that Kiens biothei will ceitainly be able topeifoimthis
long-awaited opeiation and theieby alleviate him of his Jewish appeaiance.
He knows foi ceitain that the iemoval of his hunchback, eithei by suigi-
cal oi saitoiial means, will iequiie moie money than he has, and theiefoie
aidently puisues his scheme to bilk Kien of his iemaining net woith. This
plot segment oeis Canetti the oppoitunity to heap eveiy iemaining anti-
.1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm : I:,
Jewish steieotype on the alieady hunched back of this little man. Fischeile
becomes the exploitative businessman who makes a huge piot while his
gentile employees iemain impoveiished. It can be no coincidence that just as
Fischeile announces the foimation of the Fiima Siegfiied Fischei, explicit
iefeiences to the Fiist Woild Wai and its afteimath begin to appeai in the
novel: the blind beggai, we leain, spent thiee long yeais at the fiont, and,
as a iesult, cannot beai the stench of caibon to this day, Fischeile maintains
that Kien went mad in the wai and still ietains an aimy-issue ievolvei, and
the same employee who will latei muidei Fischeile tuins out to have a wai
injuiy that cuiiously aects his memoiy.
75
Sandwiched between two books that play piimaiily within inteiioi space,
Book : alone piovides a moie sustained opening to the social setting. It may
theiefoie be advisable to pay some attention to the social enviionment met-
onymically signiedby these iefeiences. Fiist of all, the wai andits afteimath
sawa maiked inciease in anti-Semitism, as Jonny Mosei explains: With the
agitation against the Jewish wai iefugees commenced the ienewed attack
on the entiie community of Austiian Jews . . . The Jews weie iepiesented
as iacketeeis, black maiketeis, wai pioteeis and shiikeis.
76
As the Jew-
ish entiepieneui, Fischeile incoipoiates each of these chaiges in some way.
His physical disguiement obviously disqualies him fiom militaiy seivice
and thus has gaineied him the status of shiikei duiing the Gieat Wai even
befoie the action of the novel commences. As an exploitei of handicapped
wai veteians and a dealei in fiaudulent goods (iecall that he sells the same
packet of cheap papeibacks to Kien ovei and ovei, iepiesenting themin each
case as something quite dieient), he incainates the clich of the dishonest
Jewish businessman. Of couise the postwai eia biought with it a plethoia of
moie geneial social ills and anxieties, many of which can be obseived in the
scene wheie the gieat ciowd gatheis outside the Theiesianumjust aftei Kien
catches Pfa and Theiese in the act of pawning his gieat piivate libiaiy.
Some ieadeis have no doubt assumed that Fischeiles concein foi his ap-
peaiance may have nothing moie to it than this: as a known thief, he feais
being iecognized by the police on account of his tiademaik hunchback. But
the novel belies this innocent assumption. Theie is a distinct dangei, it ap-
peais, in looking too Jewish, especially when a Viennese ciowd, ioiled
by iumois of a gieat ciime, and alieady sueiing the shoitages of a lag-
ging, ination-iidden postwai economy, is looking foi a scapegoat. When
Fischeile ist sees the ciowd he is emboldened by the piospects foi pick-
I_o : .1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm
pocketing, thus coniming his own image of Jews as essentially ciiminal:
Among such a mass of people a mass of money might be made.
77
Yet in
veiy shoit oidei he becomes the object himself of this agitated ciowds iie:
Fischeile heaid the iepioaches heaped upon him . . . A dwaif would get
twenty yeais. Capital punishment ought to be ie-intioduced. Ciipples ought
to be exteiminated. All ciiminals aie ciipples. No, all ciipples aie ciiminals
. . . Why cant he eain an honest penny. Taking biead out of peoples mouths.
Whats he want with peails, a ciipple like him, and that Jewnose ought to be
cut o.
78
In unmistakable teims, the invective of what has become a wiath-
ful lynch mob culminates in coipoieal anti-Semitism. The indiiect speech
of the Geiman gives peihaps a bettei impiession of the way the novel hosts
what is at ist a iichly confused polyphony of voices and giadually galva-
nizes them into a homogenous anti-Semitic choiigiving iise, ultimately,
to the antithesis of Bakhtins piogiessive notion of hetercglcssia.
79
Fischeile
escapes theii iage, when, just inthe nick of time, die Fischerin(the Fishwife in
the Wedgwood tianslation)Fischeiles female doubleappeais elsewheie
in the ciowd. Owing to theii uncanny physical iesemblance, the Fishwife
takes the blows intended foi the othei little Jew: The ciowd falls upon hei
. . . The Fishwife falls to the giound. She lies on hei belly and keeps quite
still. They mess hei up teiiibly . . . No doubt about the genuineness of the
hump. The ciowd bieaks ovei it . . . Then she loses consciousness.
80
Reecting on the iole which the Jews play in the cultuial woild of Chiis-
tianity as the ultimate object of piojection, Sandei Gilman iemaiks: The
Jew, caught up in such a system of iepiesentation, has but little choice: his
essence, which incoipoiates the hoiiois piojected on to him and which is
embodied (quite liteiaiily sic]) in his physical being, must tiy, on one level
oi anothei, to become invisible.
81
This is piecisely what Fischeile attempts
to do. In what amounts to a caiicatuie of the old foimula foi assimilation,
wealth and cultivation (Besitz und Bildung), Fischeile seeks a doctoial title
to accompany his newly acquiied wealth, in the conviction that this will gain
him, if not invisibility, then at least some iespect in the eyes of the police. In
the following we notice how Fischeile clings to the illusion that cultuie
heie metonymically iepiesented by the ieveied Geiman Dcktcrwurdecan
mitigate his physical Jewishness: All the same, he was afiaid. He couldnt
help his shape. Nowif only he weie called Di. Fischei instead of plain Fischei
the police would iespect him at once.
82
Although the men of the undei-
woild pub tiy to convince Fischeile that such a Dcktcrtitel would do little
.1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm : I_I
good foi someone so misshapen as he, Fischeile vehemently disagiees, and
launches into a diunken, ludicious tale about a tiny doctoi even moie dis-
guied than he. Fischeile pievails on this point, piocuies the passpoit, and
pioceeds to the tailoi, wheie he oideis a suit that will iendei his hunch-
back invisible. His new suit tted him like the most splendid of combina-
tions. Whatevei tiace was left of his hump disappeaied undei the coat.
83
Fischeiles eoits to eiadicate his Jewishness by saitoiial subteifuge ievei-
beiate in the anti-Semitic caiicatuie of the day, placing him squaiely within
the tiadition of the iidiculed Jewish paivenu.
84
While waiting foi his wondei suita kind of Tainkappe foi his de-
foimed toisoto be piopeily tted, Fischeile attempts to leain the lan-
guage of his futuie home, Ameiikanisch. Piacticing loudly in the paik,
Fischeile aiouses the attention of a numbei of passeisby. Because he be-
lieves alieady to have dispensed with the hunchbackhis hump was on its
last legs
85
Fischeile hopes, but cannot ieally convince himself, that the
attention he ieceives is just innocent cuiiosity. These self-taught language
lessons aie intended to put the nal touch on a physical tiansfoimation of
which he does not himself seem fully condent. Still, his hope is to jettison
his all-too-ievealing Jewish-Viennese dialect by acquiiing English. When
evening comes, a gioup of menacing youths appioaches Fischeile, and he
immediately assumes the woist:
86
A few boys heided themselves togethei
and waited until the last giown-up had gone. Suddenly they suiiounded
Fischeiles bench and buist into an English choius. They yelled Yes but
they meant Jew the GeimanJa[Judeis alliteiative and makes the auial
confusion moie plausible]. Befcre he decided on his jouiney, Fischeile had
feaied boys like the plague . . . but now] he was neithei a Jew noi a ciipple,
he was a ne fellow and knew all about wigwams.
87
Fischeile suivives the
haiassment, and ietuins to pick up his newset of clothes. Fully decked out in
a gaiish outta black and white checked suit, biight blue coat, and canaiy
yellow shoeshe becomes a walking paiody of the Jewish paivenu. The tai-
loi gazes pioudly down upon his own saitoiial miiacle, the veiy image of a
well-bied dwaif,
88
but attiibutes this tiansfoimation, ultimately, not to his
ciaft, but to humanist cultuie. It is the tailoi, oddly enough, who ieminds
us one last time of the emancipatoiy piomises of Geiman cultuie. In good
idealist fashion (and with an iiony meant only foi the ieadei), he sonoiously
opines that it is not the body, in the nal analysis, that has the last woid:
the education of the heait is all.
89
Figure ;. }ewish Metamcrphcsis. Thcugh Fischerle believes that his ingenicus tailcr has remcved all vestiges cf his }ewishness,
he cf ccurse remains physically markedjust like the gure in the cartccn abcveas a }ew.
.1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm : I__
Aecting a Geiman accented with Ameiican intonation, Fischeile man-
ages to convince a tiain ticket salesman that he is indeed an Ameiican busi-
nessman. Appeaiing, he hopes, as a smaitly diessed peison, iejuvenated
and well boin,
90
Fischeile delights in his gieat success in deceiving the
tiain ocial into believing that he is a highly desiiable foieignei, iathei than
one of the gieat unwashed, that mass of Galician Jews that ooded the Aus-
tiian capital duiing and aftei the Fiist Woild Wai: Fiom this Fischeile as-
sumed iightly and with piide that he was no longei iecognizable.
91
All of which does him piecious little good, howevei. Foi when he ietuins
home to iecovei an addiess book in which he will caiefully insciibe his new
title and place of iesidence (Doktoi Fischei, New Yoik), Fischeiles new
set of clothes and newly acquiied English fail to conceal his identity fiom a
vengeful foimei employee. His longstanding desiie to have his hunchback
iemoved is nally gianted, but ceitainly not in the mannei he had hoped.
Fischeile becomes the Opeiated Jew of the late Weimai peiiod, whose
doomed assimilationist eoits cannot even get him ovei the boidei: A st
shatteis his skull.The blind man huiled him to the giound and fetched
fiom the table in the coinei of the little ioom a biead knife. With this he
slit his coat and suit to shieds and cut o Fischeiles hump. He panted ovei
the laboiious woik, the knife was too blunt foi him and he wouldnt stiike
a light . . . He wiapped the hump in the stiips of the coat, spat on it once
oi twice and left the paicel wheie it was. The coipse he shoved undei the
bed.
92
He is thus muideied as unceiemoniously and as biutally as was the
Fischeiinthe only guies explicitly slain within the action of the novel,
and both Jews.
Long aftei Fischeile makes his bloody exit fiom the novel, his voice ie-
emeiges, if only momentaiily, by way of a telegiam he had eailiei sent
to Geoig. Fischeile settles upon this plan because he thinks Geoig might
be able to suigically iemove his hunchback, and is theiefoie keen on lui-
ing him undei false pietenses to Vienna. He composes a succinct cable in
Kiens name, indicating that he uigently iequiies the piofessional assistance
of his youngei biothei. The woids Fischeile caiefully selects betiay the veiy
Jewishness he so assiduously shuns.
93
When Geoig iips open the telegiam
and ieads aloud the woids, Bin total meschugge. Dein Biudei (Am com-
pletely ciackeis. Youi biothei),
94
the Yiddish woid meschugge stiikes
himcoiiectly, as it happensas totally unchaiacteiistic of his leainedphi-
lologist biothei. But foi us it seives as one last iemindei that Fischeile, de-
I_ : .1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm
spite his iecently acquiied Bildung, language lessons, and new set of clothes,
iemains tiagically and inescapably Jewish in an enviionment incieasingly
hostile to Jews.
It is tiue that Canetti felt some discomfoit about Fischeile in the wake
of the Holocaust. Might he have contiibuted to the veiy anti-Semitism he
sought to document: Could the novels depiction of Fischeile as a iepug-
nant, self-hating Jew have played into the hands of those who implemented
oi sought to justify the mass killings of Jews: Oi might this book have simply
enteitained and titillated anti-Semites: That Nazi ocials chose to ban the
novel iathei than exploit it foi piopaganda puiposes would suggest that it
did not lend itself veiy easily to such a use. But Canetti was of couise awaie
of the wide iange of iesponses evoked by ait, paiticulaily modeinist ait, and
knew that his ieadeis might diaw conclusions fiom the novel that dieied
maikedly fiom his own intentions. He latei wiote that he dieaded iunning
into people who had just iead Autc-da-Fe, because they inevitably tended to
locate the wietchedness of the novel in the authoi himself. Not coinciden-
tally, I believe, Canetti puts his defense of Fischeile into the mouth of the
ieveied Hebiaist Isaiah Sonne, who justies this potentially oensive chai-
acteiization in this way: People will biistle at Fischeile because he is a Jew,
and will iepioach the authoi with the chaige that this guie can be mis-
iead as if in suppoit of the odious sentiments of the times. Yet this guie
is tiue, as tiue as the naiiow-minded, iustic housekeepei Theiese] oi the
abusive building supeiintendent Pfa]. When the catastiophe is ovei, all
chaiges of this kind will fall away fiom the guies and they will stand ie-
vealed as that which led to the catastiophe. This is the impoitant passage
that piecedes Canettis moie fiequently cited line iegaiding his iegiet about
Fischeile: I mention only this one detail because latei, with the piogiess of
events, I often felt discomfoit iegaiding Fischeile, and then I always sought
iefuge in this eaily justication.
95
This defense is inteiesting not because it comes fiom Sonnethat we
may nevei be able to coiioboiatebut because it contains an awaieness on
the pait of Canetti of the essential instability of paiody. If Canetti ieally did
suei pangs of conscience, howevei, I suspect that it was due not only to
the potential misundeistandings that his book might inspiie, but because
he ieally does taiget Jews, at least in pait, as complicit by way of Jewish self-
hatied. Complicit, howevei, in the iising tide of iacial anti-Semitism of the
eaily I,_osnot in the oiganized destiuction of Euiopean Jews that com-
.1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm : I_,
menced in the eaily I,os. This distinction might well be lost in the post-
Holocaust eia and thus give iise to the authois quite undeistandable un-
easiness (Unbehagen).
Yet we should not peimit this to obscuie the novels bioadei fiame of
iefeience. Kiens betiayal of Fischeile, which he giounds in philological
humanism, commences almost fiom the moment they meet. It is then that
we witness Kien distoiting the idealist Schilleiian sentiment, It is the spiiit
which builds itself a body, into a justication foi Fischeiles defoimed Jew-
ish body iathei than employing it as a motto of libeiation fiomsuch iiiatio-
nal piejudice. In othei woids, Sonnes contention, that Fischeile, along with
this galleiy of despicable guies, indicts not the authoi but the times fiom
which he diew them, does in the end iing tiue. Specically, his insightful
foimulation conceining these chaiacteis as that which led to the catastio-
phe seems apiopos of Fischeile. Canetti may still be iight towoiiy that even
seiious humoi about giotesque attempts at assimilation will be iejected by
some ieadeis as simply in pooi taste. Yet the laigei peispective, which de-
mands that we see Fischeile not only as an icon of iacial anti-Semitism, but
moie specically as a pioduct of a bankiupt, socially iiielevant humanism,
iaises this handicapped Jew to a tiagic sign of the times.
While Fischeile is, I think, best undeistood in teims of this laigei piob-
lematic, he iemains a locus of multivalent tension. When Nicola Riednei,
one of the few ciitics intimately familiai with the novels anti-Semitic dis-
couise, aigues that we should viewFischeile as punished foi an oveiweening
assimilation diive, she foundeis on numeious counts, not the least of which
is hei cuiious imposition of a iational choice model to the viitual exclu-
sion of the veiy complex matiix of social and political foices she heiself has
documented. Yet hei aigument poweifully communicates the distinctly dis-
tasteful degiee of excess in this guie. Though oui post-Holocaust vantage
point has much to do with itone cannot simply biacket out the histoiical
fact that Eastein Euiopean Jews weie muideied at much highei iates than
Geiman JewsCanettis piactice of giotesque caiicatuie peihaps exceeds
his own naiiative intentions. In discussing the novels attitude towaid mi-
sogyny (chaptei :), we noted Canettis use of hypeibolic paiody, a technique
that iisks a measuie of complicity as ciitique. The same holds tiue heie. It
would, howevei, be an unfoitunate mistake to peimit this obseivation to
obscuie the fact that in the end it is indeed Fischeile, and not the voluble
and self-pitying Kien, as some eaily ciitics would have it, who becomes the
I_o : .1i - simi 1i sm .i 1ui i.i i0vi oi u0m.i sm
novels ieal victimof modeinitys ciisis of values. Yet it would be equally mis-
taken to oveilook the way in which Siegfiied Fischeile outstiips his didactic
function and continues to haunt the novel long aftei he is muideied.
Up to this point in this study we have seen how Canetti has left a tiailpei-
haps something moie like an elaboiate web of tiailslinking this novel to
bioadei social and intellectual conceins. The next chaptei will be conceined
less with positive tiaces of inteitextuality than with a palpable but cuiiously
obscuied piesence, namely that of Sigmund Fieud. Foi ieadeis of the I,_os,
Fieud haidly needed to be evoked. Among latei ciitics who fell undei the au-
thois own anti-Fieudian spell, Fieud seems unaccountably absent. In eithei
case, the novels ielationship to Fieud and populaiized Fieudianism ciies
out foi elucidation.
, An Impudent Choii of
Cioaking Fiogs
Fieud and the Fieudians as the
Novels Seciet Shaieis
Fieud, howevei, was not conceined with politics, not even sexual politics.
Petei Gay
1
An Anxiety of Inuence:
Canettis hostility towaid psychoanalysis is legendaiy, yet it is a fact
usually mentioned in the context of his much latei Crcwds and Pcwer (I,oo),
and seldom in connection with the novel of I,_I. Though commentatois
on the novel could scaicely have missed Canettis disdain foi Fieud, they
seemon the whole to have assumed that the novel dismisses iathei than con-
fionts Fieud, few, at any iate, have paid any kind of sustained attention to
the novels thick web of Fieudian allusions. Though Geiald Stieg pioposes
that both Autc-da-Fe and Civilizaticn and Its Disccntents (I,_o) be seen as
quite specic and contiastive iesponses to the I,:, iiot[massacie that fol-
lowed the buining of the Viennese Palace of Justice, he is unable, in the end,
to show how the novel ieally answeis Fieud.
2
Yet Fieud is alieady piesent
in Autc-da-Fe, and it will be the task of this chaptei to show how poweiful
evenoi especiallya negative inuence can be. How, indeed, could a nov-
elist as intellectually ambitious as Canetti ignoie one of the most inuential
thinkeis of his own time:
What complicates oui inquiiy, howeveiand this may explain the hesi-
tance of ciitics to take this pathis the fact that Canetti nevei set out to
iefute Fieud diiectly, foi that might on the one hand imply an acquiescence
in the Fieudian agenda, and on the othei would be inappiopiiate to a lit-
erary engagement. A moie diiect confiontation would indeed have to wait
I_8 : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
thiity yeais foi Crcwds and Pcwer. Fuitheimoie, Canettis impatience with
Fieudian giand theoiies is, at this time, inextiicably bound up with his cii-
tique of Fieuds disciples, whom he held to be oveizealous, to say the least.
His taigets in the novel, theiefoie, will nevei be puie instances of unadul-
teiated Fieudian dogma. Instead the novels evocations of Fieud will always
include an element of populaiization, deviation and mispiision. While this
ensuies that the novel iesonates moie iichly with the widespiead cultuial
ieception of Fieud, it will no doubt iiiitate Fieud puiiststo the extent that
such a gioup is to be found among Canetti acionados in the ist place.
Suipiisingly, theie aie a few instances in which Canetti acknowledged
an intellectual debt to Fieud. The most memoiable of these is in a I,o:
iadio inteiview with Theodoi W. Adoino, who was keen to iectify what
he peiceived to be a glaiing lacuna in the iecently published Crcwds and
Pcwer. Canetti completed this lengthy anthiopological study without once
mentioning Fieud by name, who, aftei all, had wiitten the most inuen-
tial essay to date on the topic of ciowd foimation and social psychology,
namely his Grcup Psychclcgy and the Analysis cf the Egc (I,:I). In iesponse
to Adoinos peisistent queiyhe ietuins to Fieud thioughout the intei-
viewCanetti musteis a fewgiacious woids foi the foundei of psychoanaly-
sis: As you speak of FieudI am the ist to admit that the innovative way
in which Fieud appioached things, without allowing himself to be distiacted
oi fiightened, made a deep impiession on me in my foimative peiiod. It is
ceitainly the case that I am now no longei convinced of some of his iesults
and must oppose some of his special theoiies. But foi the way he tackled
things, I still have the deepest iespect.
3
This diplomatically woided homageintended, I would wagei, to pla-
cate those ciitics who iead Canettis omission as an aiiogant dismissal of
a woithy piedecessoimay ultimately only confuse the mattei. Foi it sug-
gests that Canettis opposition to Fieud is both of iecent vintage (e.g., I
am nc lcnger convinced) and paitial (scme of his iesults . . . and] scme
of his special theoiies).
4
In fact, neithei claim is tiue. Foi the eailiest of
Canettis wiitings, Autc-da-Fe, alieady ieveals a pattein not of positive in-
uence, but of thoioughgoing dissent. Twenty odd yeais aftei the inteiview
with Adoino, an eldeily Canettithe esteemed Nobel lauieate appioach-
ing his eightieth biithdayseems to have been at gieatei ease in ieecting
on the place of Fieud in his life. The nal volume of his autobiogiaphy, Das
Augenspiel. Lebensgeschichte :;,::;,, (The Play of the Eyes), is stiewn with
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : I_,
obseivations that leave no doubt that the young authoi of Autc-da-Fe was
alieady deteimined to do battle with Fieud.
The Dispute with Bioch
The context foi such ieections is fiequently a ieminiscence about the
authoi Heimann Bioch, whomCanetti loved and admiied despite his devo-
tion to Fieud: He had ieally fallen foi Fieud, in a ieligious mannei I would
say, I dont mean to say that he had become a zealot, like so many otheis
whom I knew at the time. Rathei, he was peimeated by Fieud, as by a mys-
tical teaching.
5
In speaking with Bioch, Canetti sounds cential objections
that will ieveibeiate thioughout his woik. Again and again he maintains,
though not always as civilly as in this fiiendly debate, essentially two points:
(I) Fieud is too ieadily cited and believed, when in ieality the phenomena
he attempts to explain iemain complex and puzzling, and (:) Fieuds theo-
iies tend to inteiioiize and peisonalize sccial ieality. The following passage,
taken fiom an exchange between Canetti and Bioch, is meant to iebu the
latteis claimthat a modeinist novel shouldincoipoiate Fieudianinsights by
piesenting psychologically iealistic chaiacteis, something Canetti in Autc-
da-Fe obviously chose not to do. To Bioch he counteis:
You gladly appeal to modein psychology. It seems to me that you aie
pioud of it because it aiose, so to speak, out of youi own intimate milieu,
fiom this special aiea of the Viennese woild. This psychology has foi you
the familiai feel of home Heimatgefuhl ] . . . Whatevei it declaies, you
nd on the spot in youiself. You dont even need to go in seaich foi it. Pie-
cisely this psychology stiikes me as completely inadequate. It conceins
itself with the individual, and in this it has accomplished something, what
it cannot compiehend is the ciowd Masse], and that is the most impoi-
tant entity, about which we need to leain. Foi all new powei that aiises
tcday diaws its sustenance fiom the ciowd. In piactice, eveiybody who
is aftei powei knows how to manipulate the ciowd.
6
The one concession Canetti makes heie to individual psychology may be
nothing moie than a polite way of dieiing with a iespected fiiend, on the
othei hand we should be caieful not to exaggeiate the dispute. As we shall
see below, Canetti will use Fieud to ciitique Fieud and what he peiceived
Io : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
to be the bioadei Fieud mania. Apait fiom this double-edged tiibute, how-
evei, we notice the classic laments. The ist, that Fieuds theoiies aie all
too easily conimed, indeed, that they aie assumed to be coiiect fiom the
outset, should be judged as much a ciitique of Fieud as of his unciitical fol-
loweis. The signicance of the second point foi the novel, which at this time
is still lying aiound in typesciipt foim, could be easily oveilooked because
Canetti is so cleaily using the language we associate with his latei woik on
Crcwds and Pcwer.
7
Yet we should not oveilook the fact that Canetti point-
edly places these iemaiks in the context of a discussion of modeinist novels.
Bioch has just iead Autc-da-Fe and ciiticizes Canetti foi failing to avail him-
self of the latest discoveiies in psychology. Canetti iesponds that Biochs
biand of psychological iealism leads not to ciitical distance, but seives in-
stead as a kind of anodyne. In a caiefully woided passage, Canetti suggests
that Biochs psychological iealism biings insight, but also soothes (beru-
higt) ieadeis in a mannei that he nds pioblematic.
This exchange, howevei much it may have been stylized oi peihaps even
invented in hindsight, is ciucial in undeistanding Canettis ielationship to
Fieudian psychology, at least as he sawit. Bioch is not an easy opponent, and
piesses his point: Theie is a modein psychology and it says things about
people that we simply cannot ignoie. Liteiatuie must be on the intellec-
tual level of its day. If it falls behind, it becomes a kind of kitsch.
8
Canetti
peisists in advocating his use of schematic guies ovei Biochs psychologi-
cally iealistic people (Menschen), a point we have touched upon alieady
in chaptei I. What is essential to undeiscoie at this junctuie is the fact that
Canetti piedicates the entiie design of his novel upon a consideied iejection
of Fieudian psychology: I, too, believe that the novel of today must be dif-
ferent, but not because we live in the eia of Fieud and Joyce. The substance of
the times is dieient, and can only be iepiesented by way of new guies.
9
Let us ietuin to that second objection with the assuiance that it has an
impoitant place in the discussion of the novel: this is Canettis assessment of
psychoanalysis as essentially an individual, peisonal aaii (befat sich mit
dem einzelnen), which is theiefoie constitutionally incapable of addiessing
the social and political, paiticulaily when it comes to the exeicise of powei.
Foi these aie piecisely the themes which had alieady found expiession in
Autc-da-Fe, as we have had occasion to see thus fai in this study. Reveal-
ing an intimate familiaiity with Fieuds Grcup Psychclcgy and the Analysis
cf the Egcthe eailiest sustained and peihaps the most impoitant eoit on
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : II
Fieuds pait to come to teims with the socialCanetti once tiied to con-
vince Bioch of the eiioi of his, and moie impoitantly Fieuds, ways. Othei-
wise toleiant and patient with his inteilocutoi, Bioch diew the line when it
came to assailing Fieud, indeed he seemed angiy whenI ciiticized Fieudian
conceptions.
10
Foi oui discussion of the novel, it is signicant to note that
Canettis ciitique heiehe aigues that ciowds aie ontologically dieient
and not suciently explained by individual psychologyaiticulates once
again his basic objection that Fieud oveiextends the peisonal. Even as sym-
pathetic a biogiaphei as Petei Gay, himself a faiily oithodox though not
unciitical Fieudian, comes to a similai conclusion iegaiding the Grcup Psy-
chclcgy essay when, inoeiing this picis, he iemaiks: The ciowd, as ciowd,
invents nothing, it only libeiates, distoits, exaggeiates, the individual mem-
beis tiaits . . . In shoit, ciowd psychology, and with it all social psychology,
is paiasitic on individual psychology, that is Fieuds point of depaituie, to
which he peisistently held.
11
Foi Gay, this is a faiily neutial obseivation,
but foi Canetti, this was wai.
It is not suipiising that the antagonist Fieud was on his mind when
Canetti sought out his beloved Di. Sonne as a sounding boaid foi some of
his evolving ideas on social phenomena, a pioject Canetti had alieady come
to see as his lifes task (Lebensaufgabe).
12
Canetti succeeds, howevei, only
in eliciting guidance on whatoi whomto avoid. Wondeiing what it must
have been like foi Sonne, the known Fieud opponent, to suei Biochs en-
thusiasm foi psychoanalysis, Canetti muses: He was fiiends with Bioch,
whom he iespected and peihaps even loved. Whenevei he spoke with him,
the conveisation will ceitainly have tuined to Fieud, to whom Bioch was
addicted dem Brcch verfallen war]. I would have loved to leain how Sonne
withstood that without inteijecting a wounding piotest.
13
Canetti did not
need to imagine such scenaiios, howevei, foi he knewfiompeisonal expeii-
ence that Sonne had no tiuck with Fieud: That he had ciucial disagiee-
ments with Fieud, I expeiienced once when I vehemently attacked the death
diive in his piesence,
14
a concept, we might note in passing, which though
tentatively intioduced alieady in Beycnd the Pleasure Principle (I,:o), be-
came a coineistone of the extiemely populai Civilizaticn and Its Disccntents
of I,_o. Sonne, at any iate, steeis his young piotg away fiom Fieud: He
wained me of doctiines that aie eveiywheie piesent but explain nothing.
Bettei than any he undeistood how much they stand in the way of gain-
ing insight into public matteis.
15
All of these anecdotal iemaiks tell us, if
I: : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
nothing else, that Canetti saw himself and otheis as ciucially engaged with
Fieudian thought at the time he wiote Autc-da-Fe.
As we have seen on numeious occasions in this study alieady, Autc-da-
Fe is nothing if not centially conceined to diagnose oui blindness to public
thingscentliche Dinge, as Canetti puts it. And thus it is not suipiising
that it is within this context that the novels confiontation with Fieud most
cleaily emeiges. I have selected thiee episodes foi analysis: the notoiious
chaptei entitled The Good Fathei (The Kind Fathei in Wedgwood), as
well as two less well known segments that have unjustly sueied neglect in
the secondaiy liteiatuie: the incident involving the mad village blacksmith
Jean Pival, and nally Geoigs cuiious Paiable of the Teimites. Each of
these passages takes as its taiget a cential Fieudian tenet: the Oedipal com-
plex, tiansfeience (and counteitiansfeience), and sublimation, iespectively.
Thoughthe novel undoubtedlycontests these notions, it wouldbe eiioneous
to iead Autc-da-Fe as an attempt to diiectly dispiove Fieud. This is an aim
suiely inconsistent with imaginative liteiatuie in geneial, and fuitheimoie
one that would make the authoi guilty of the veiy ciime of which he ac-
cuses the Fieudians: oveiieaching. In concluding with an analysis of Geoig
as a paiodic vehicle foi Fieudian ideas and associations, the ielationship of
Crcwds and Pcwer to the novelan aliation which thus fai has not ie-
dounded to the favoi of Autc-da-Fewill emeige in a cleaiei light. We will
see that while both challenge fundamental Fieudian notions, they do so in
quite dieient ways.
Fathei Knows Best: Unseating the Electia Complex
Sadismin the evening is iefieshing and biacing! Max Pulveis iesponse,
the ist on iecoid to what is peihaps the best-known chaptei of Autc-da-
Fe, The Good Fathei, appaiently bioke the silence of an agitated and be-
mused salon audience, which had gatheied in Zuiich to heai the young au-
thoi iead fiom his yet unpublished woik.
16
At a latei ieading of this same
piece in Vienna, Canetti would be accused of inhumanity (Unmenschlich-
keit), indeed, sometimes the most positive iemaik Canettis auditois could
mustei was the assuiance that the authoi would one day outgiow this kind
of wiiting.
17
Well befoie feminist ciitics would diawoui attention to the vio-
lence peipetiated upon women in this novelsometimes in the piocess ac-
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : I_
cusing the authoi himself of piomoting the misogyny depicted heie (see
above, chaptei :)Canetti had been subjected to a ieal scolding (eine
wahre Schelte) by his contempoiaiies foi this staik and unspaiing poitiayal
of child and spousal abuse.
18
The Good Fathei (Der gute Vater), an iionic iefeience, of couise, to the
veiy bad fathei Benedict Pfa, contains only the most concentiated pait of
a stoiy that in fact extends thioughout the novel. It is in this chaptei, how-
evei, that we aie confionted with a ciitical mass of inciiminating evidence
against an abusive fathei who has been tiying (and will continue to attempt)
to suppiess, distoit, and tiivialize the extent of his sexual violence. Con-
tempoiaiy ieadeis may be tempted to attiibute the attention accoided this
chaptei to the iise of ciitical paiadigms infoimed by second-wave (i.e., post-
I,o8) feminism, and to some extent this is peifectly tiue. Yet as we have seen,
Der gute Vater alieady enjoyed an unmistakable piominenceand not only
in the eyes of the authoi, as we shall seeeven befoie the novel appeaied in
piint. Canetti, at any iate, iefeiied to this chaptei as the indispensable pait
of the novel,
19
and latei as an obligatoiy component of his peifoimance
iepeitoiie.
20
Oui good fathei is of couise Kiens Hausbesoigeia kind of dooi-
man cum building supeiintendentlong known to us as an unambiguous
woman-hatei. WhenKienist calls uponhis seivices, well befoie the chaptei
in question opens, Benedikt Pfa assumes his assignment is to beat Theiese:
Foi yeais he had longed in vain foi an oppoitunity to smash up a piece of
womans esh.
21
Pfa is quick to assuie us that his motto, Women ought
to be beaten to death. The whole lot of them,
22
is based on peisonal expeii-
ence: My old woman now, she was black and blue to the end of hei days.
My pooi daughtei, God iest hei, I was that fond of hei, theie was a woman
foi you now, as the saying is, I staited with hei when she was that high.
23
Pfas sexual abuse of his daughtei takes on newdimensions staiting on
the day of his wifes funeial. Tellingly, Pfa is ieminded of the sexual iela-
tionship with his daughtei just as he begins sleeping with Theiese, a com-
paiison that cleaily does not favoi the oldei woman: If only she Theiese]
weie foity yeais youngei. His daughtei, God iest hei, she had a heait of gold.
She had to lie down beside himwhile he watched out foi beggais. He used to
pinch and look. Look and pinch. Those weie the days! . . . Ciy, she used to.
Didnt do hei no good. You cant do anything against a fathei. Ah, she was a
love. All of a sudden she died . . . He simply couldnt do without hei.
24
The
I : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
Hausbesoigeis spoiadic but insistently bad conscience slowly ieveals a pat-
tein of fathei-daughtei assault and molestation. Piodded by the likelihood
that the authoiities will imminently appeai at the Theiesianum, wheie he
and Theiese aie attempting to pawn Kiens libiaiy, Pfa imagines himself
punished not foi dealing in stolen piopeity, that is, foi his cuiient and evi-
dent infiaction, but foi sexually abusing and muideiing his daughtei yeais
ago: The caietakei stood stock still. He saw it: on eveiy ist of the month
someone would come to take away his pension instead of paying it out to
him. Theyll lock him up as well . . . Eveiything will come out and the plain-
tis will continue to violate his daughtei posthumously. He isnt afiaid . . .
He is ietiied on a pension. He isnt afiaid. The doctoi said himself, its hei
lungs. Send hei away! How would I do that, mistei: He needs his pension
just to eat . . . Health insuiancethe idea! Suddenly shed ietuin to himwith
a baby. In that tiny ioom. He isnt afiaid!
25
With the phiase and the plaintis ccntinue to violate his daughtei in the
giave (und die Parteien schanden seine Tcchter noch im Grab), his feai that
eveiything will come out (even while he iepeatedly denies being afiaid),
not to mention his foieboding that Anna will ietuin with a baby fiom a
medical exam supposedly made necessaiy because of hei lungs, Pfa con-
victs himself in his own idiom. Foi this naiiated monologue cleaily belongs
to his linguistic and mental iepeitoiy. When the police actually aiiive, Pfa
immediately thinks, My daughtei! and duiing the ensuing police inquiiy
he iefeis the muidei that Kien insists having peipetiated uponTheiese back
to his own guilty conscience: The Piofessoi was talking about a wife, but
he meant my daughtei.
26
Kien is lying about a muidei he nevei committed
(though he feivently wishes he had), Pfa dissimulates about a muidei he
actually committed but cannot fully suppiess. All of this leads up to the epi-
sode in question.
The Good Fathei chaptei gives a moie complete pictuie of this un-
savoiy incestuous abuse, but one that has iaiely been fully acknowledged
in the ciitical liteiatuie until iecently, as Kiistie Foell documents in Blind
Reecticns, hei Canetti monogiaph of I,,,. This may be due to the fact that
Pfa, whose denial of the ciimes against his daughtei is only occasionally
and inadveitently punctuied by feelings of guilt and concomitant moments
of honesty, is laigely in linguistic contiol of this chaptei. This fact, combined
with a hesitance on the pait of ciiticsacting, peihaps, on the same feel-
ings of disgust iegisteied by Canettis eaily auditoisto addiess such issues,
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : I,
may explain why Kien has so often been poitiayed as the piincipal victim
of Pfas aggiession. At any iate, as the famous fathei-daughtei dialogue
iefeiied to above in chaptei : illustiates, Pfas powei ovei his daughtei is
mediated by a kind of semiotic extoition. Acential point foi Canetti, heie as
in the contempoianeous play Hcchzeit (The Wedding), is that language does
not meiely iepiesent powei ielations, but actively stiuctuies them. While
tiue, we should also acknowledge that language is simply an easiei topic
foi ciitics to handle, the veneiated ciisis of language (Sprachkrise) whose
pedigiee ieaches back at least as fai as Hofmannsthals Lcrd Chandcs Brief
(I,o:) piovided a ciitical context foi the discussion of The Good Fathei
that often led away fiom the substance of this infamous exchange. One of
the cential points of that one-sided dialogue is aftei all the fatheis pointed
piohibition of cther iomantic inteieststheie shall be no othei suitois be-
side hima point that is all too easily lost in moie abstiact discussions of
iefeientiality and linguistics. The exchange commences with Pfa talking
to himself and does not essentially change, despite the coeiced inclusion of
Annas voice:
A fathei has a iight to . . . . . . the love of his child. Loud and toneless,
as though she weie at school, she completed his sentences. . . .]
Foi getting maiiied my daughtei . . .he held out his aim. . . has
no time.
She gets hei keep fiom . . . . . . hei good fathei.
Othei men do not want . . . . . . to have hei.
27
With iegaid to the implicit Fieud debate, it is of obvious impoit that the ex-
clusion of othei eiotic inteiests is an unambiguous function of the fatheis
unseemly desiie foi the daughtei, and not vice veisa. The extent to which
Anna is ieduced to a function of hei fatheis fantasy woild is made abun-
dantly evident by the fact that she is compelled not only to speak like hei
fathei, but to diess like him as well. Weaiing his pants, doing his job, and
ultimately beaiing his namehe ienames hei Poli (Polly inWedgwood)
to iemind him of the Polizist he once wasAnnas independent existence
is eectively obliteiated. And this, Pfa opines, is the way to handle women
aftei all: Since he had nominated hei Polly, he was pioud of hei. Women
weie good foi something aftei all, men just have to undeistand howto make
Pollys of them.
28
The othei whomAnna impeisonates is meiely a gment
of hei fatheis naicissistic imagination, a sadomasochistic stimulant to his
Io : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
sexual fantasy. Having subjugated hei in this mannei, Pfa was inclined to
pleasuie: Foi houis he fondled hei.
29
Just as he has sciipted his own wifes death,
30
Pfa activelybut unsuc-
cessfullyattempts to camouage the incest as some kind of acceptable
pateinal solicitousness. Given this imbalance of naiiative powei, we must
sometimes piece togethei the actual abuse fiom ievelatoiy fiagments scat-
teied thioughout the naiiative. Foi example, in a passage cleaily desciib-
ing the fathei-daughtei ielationship subsequent to the motheis death, we
encountei the astonishing phiasecleaily attiibutable to Annas conscious-
nessin the long yeais of their marriage (in den langen }ahren ihiei Ehe).
31
Maiiiage is of couise the most aiiesting teimheie, wheieas the desciiptive
phiase long yeais indicates the daughteis subjective expeiience of time
in this oppiessive ielationship. If this might quickly be passed ovei, then we
need only tuin to Pfas bluntei foimulations. Foi he uses within the space
of thiee pages two sepaiate teims foi the illicit honeymoon (Vcnnemcnd
and Hcnigmcnd) he shamelessly conducts with his daughtei since his wifes
piematuie demise.
32
Fuitheimoie, when Anna engages in hei doomed fantasy of iedemption,
she attends to a saitoiial mattei that might seem extianeous until we iealize
hei need to appeai to hei would-be savioi, the black knight Fianz, as the
viigin she no longei is: She takes all the money with hei, ovei hei night-
gown she slips on hei own coat, the one shes nevei allowed to weai, not the
old cast-o of hei fatheis, thus she appeais to be a viigin.
33
The signi-
cance of this appaient detail becomes cleaiei when we tuin oui attention
to the culmination of Annas fantasy: just as Fianz declaies his deteimina-
tion to maiiy hei and hei alone, Anna has him take appioving notice of hei
newcoat.
34
Again, if Annas subaltein language peimits alteinate and less
iepellent inteipietive possibilities, hei fatheis less subtle mannei of speech
pioves stunningly less ambiguous. Inhabiting the naiiatois voice, he ielates:
While she beat the steak foi his dinnei, he could thump hei to his heaits
content. His eye did not know what his hand did.
35
Thus we can easily sui-
mise the ieason foi hei unmistakable feai of the maiital bed, the feai which
this piece of fuinituie instilled into hei.
36
In the end we leain that, aftei
being beaten almost to death, she lived foi seveial moie yeais as hei fatheis
seivant and wife,
37
at which point the teim Weib (wife, woman) as des-
ignation foi Anna should no longei suipiise usyet it does. We aie left to
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : I,
wondei only if the guilt-iidden Pfa, in an inteitextual iefeience to Poe,
38
has walled up his daughteis coipse in the adjoining ioom. Ceitainly the
evidence of his escalatingly guilty conscience, whose demands incieasingly
intiude upon his consciousness and culminate in his confession to Geoig,
39
calls to mind the unfoigettable Tell-Tale Heait.
40
But domestic violence was not Canettis onlyoi, peihaps, even piinci-
palpoint heie, and the contiast with Kien, whom Pfa thieatens with a
similai fate of domestic inteiment, claiies the issue. Paiticulai to Annas
stoiy aie two factois: the incest itself, and the concomitant, elaboiate eoit
to ieconstiuct hei as a meie suppoiting actoi in Pfas psychodiama. These
two elements piopel the stoiy into conict with an inuential cultuial nai-
iative alieady imly entienched at the time of the novels wiiting and one
that, if we can believe Adolf Giunbaums pionouncement on the piesent
stunningly ubiquitous cultuial inuence of the Fieudian coipus, is laigely
with us still.
41
In plotting this stoiy, Canetti goes to some lengths to insuie
that this naiiative both conjuies and collides head on with Fieuds account
of fatheis and daughteis. In naming his ctional daughtei aftei Fieuds own
daughtei, Anna, Canetti may indeed have eained the compliment pioeied
by Fiiedl Benedikt: Nobody can wiite as wickedly as you.
42
It is this single fathei-daughtei ielationship, in fact, that can be said to
have given biith to psychoanalysis, despite the fact that Fieud would alieady
in the Weimai peiiod be accused of a myopic pieoccupation with men
that is, with sons and motheisand of having founded a masculine psy-
chology.
43
In the beginning, howevei, Fieud deiived much of his theoiy
fiom the analysis of what was then known as female hysteiia. Though Fieud
encounteied case aftei case of incest and sexual assault by fatheis and fathei
guies, he inteipieted these stoiies as defenses against a deepei tiuth: the
daughteis unacknowledged sexual desiie foi theii fatheis. And in this way
he was able to conimthat coineistone of psychoanalysis, the Oedipus com-
plex. Latei, Fieud would contend that any seiious detiactoi would have to
come to teims with this cential tenet: Eveiy human newcomei has been
set the task of masteiing the Oedipus complex. Whoevei cannot manage it
falls piey to neuiosis. The piogiess of psychoanalytic woik has sketched the
signicance of the Oedipus complex evei moie shaiply, its iecognition has
become the shibboleth that sepaiates the adheients of psychoanalysis fiom
its opponents.
44
Thus Fieud, who by now had placed the Oedipus complex
I8 : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
squaiely at the centei of his contioveisial account of the iise of civilization
(Tctem and Tabcc), diew a line in the sand. And Canetti, with his fiequent
public ienditions of The Good Fathei, meant to cioss it.
Fieuds account of the giils passage thiough the Oedipus complex has
of couise pioven notoiiously contioveisial. Even in his own woids, Fieud
seems to suggest that the giil does not so much pass thiough as iemain
miied in hei eiotic attachment to the fathei. Tiue, she tiansfeis hei love fiom
mothei to fathei, but wheie does she go fiomheie: Fieuds own pionounce-
ment does not oei much hope: She slipsalong the line of symbolic equa-
tion, one might sayfiompenis to a baby. Hei Oedipus complex culminates
in a desiie, which is long ietained, to ieceive a baby fiom hei fathei as a
giftto beai hima child.
45
Indeed, as Judith Lewis Heiman aigues, Fieuds
model posits giils who aie piedisposed to fathei-daughtei incest.
46
It is not
dicult to see how this side of the Oedipus complex would piove useful to
Fieud in dispelling the claims of sexual tiauma made by his female hystei-
ics: theii stoiies only seived to conceal theii own illicit desiie. Though it
would be unfaii to suggest that Fieud actually sanctioned the sexual assault
of daughteis by fatheis (and fathei guies, like uncles and oldei male fiiends
of the family), oi that he completely denied such abuse, his theoiy would
seive poweifully to disguise such molestation as the fantasy of maladjusted
women. In the Intrcductcry Lectures, Fieud iecounts iathei candidly why he
was moved to iecant his own seduction theoiy, an inteipietation that ac-
cepted at face value the accounts of his female hysteiics, in favoi of the
allegedly deepei explanatoiy powei of the Oedipus complex: Almost all of
my women patients told me that they had been seduced by theii fathei. I
was diiven to iecognize in the end that these iepoits weie untiue and so
came to undeistand that the hysteiical symptoms aie deiived fiom phan-
tasies and not fiom ieal occuiiences . . . It was only latei that I was able to
iecognize in this phantasy of being seduced by the fathei the expiession of
the typical Oedipus complex in women.
47
In a footnote appended to a sub-
sequent edition of Studies cn Hysteria, Fieud did admit to falsifying a case
study by suppiessing the fact that a fathei was in fact the peipetiatoi of the
molestation of his daughtei.
48
But this was of little consequence in light of
his continued tiumpeting of the female Oedipal complex, which in eect
suggests that if the daughtei does not wholly imagine the abuse, then at least
she can be thought to have elicited it on account of an uniesolved eiotic
attachment to hei fathei.
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : I,
What Fieud had diiven inwaid, Canetti was deteimined to biing into the
light of day. The Good Fathei, with its blunt poitiayal of Pfas abuse of
Anna, challenges the Fieudian inteinalization of this fathei-daughtei con-
ict. Despite obvious thematic paiallels that would at ist invite a Fieudian
ieading, Annas piedicament cannot possibly be giasped by means of the
Fieudian piefabiicated postulate of daughteily desiie. And, as if it weie not
alieady abundantly cleai that Fieud is the spectial antagonist in The Good
Fathei, the title itself seems designed to cement the allusion and claiify the
taiget. Foi though it is the beleagueied daughtei who is foiced to bestowthe
epithet the good fathei on the villainous Pfa, we come to see by means
of the inteitextual dynamic implicit in this chaptei that it is none othei than
Fieud who makes this appellation cultuially availableand pioblematic.
In bequeathing this title to the patiiaichal society of his day, Fieud autho-
iizeshowevei inadveitentlya kind of blindness to social ieality, one of
the piincipal vaiieties of Blendung aiiaigned in this novel. Viewing The
Good Fathei as a counteinaiiative to what Jung latei dubbed the Electia
Complex expands oui undeistanding of Canettis ciitique of contempo-
iaiy misogyny, exploied above in chaptei :. In the case of Pfa it is cleaily
not a mattei of an individuals use of the feminine to shoie up a dissolving
selfhe, like many lowei-class peisonages of liteiaiy modeinism, does not
possess enough of a self to be taken seiiously in this iegaidbut a laigei
cultuial naiiative that is heie put on tiial. Fiom this peispective, the sta-
bility and aimation the Viennese patiiaichy deiives fiom Fieuds Oedipus
complexdespite the suiface clamoi and claims of outiagecomes at the
piice of iepiessing a iepiehensible social ieality.
49
Apiopos of oveiieaching theoiy and in paiticulai of his ieception of
Fieud, Canetti once obseived:
Among the most uncanny phenomena of human intellectual histoiy is
the evasion of conciete expeiience das Ausweichen vcr dem Kcnkreten].
Theie exists a stiiking penchant to go aftei the most distant of things
ist and to oveilook eveiything that one continually knocks up against
in the immediate vicinity. The soaiing aic of giand inteipietive] ges-
tuiesthe adventuie and audacity of expeditions into the unknown
masks the motivations foi going theie. Not infiequently, it is simply a
mattei of avoiding the most immediate ieality because we aie not equal
to it.
50
I,o : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
This evasion of the conciete is, I would suggest, the iubiic that best cap-
tuies Canettis Fieud ciitique, heie and in subsequent passages consideied in
this chaptei. Fieuds piomulgation of the Oedipus complex comes undei ie
in Autc-da-Fe not because it is inheiently wiong as a model foi individual
psychologythat is simply not at issue heiebut because it is oveiextended
in a mannei inconsistent with obseivable social facts. It is quite tiue that
Canetti would latei ieject the Oedipus complex outiightieplacing it in
Crcwds and Pcwer with the moie positive concept of Verwandlung (tians-
foimation)
51
but the novels disavowal of this cential Fieudian notion is
alieady conspicuous.
Canetti is fully awaie that his fathei-daughtei naiiative shifts the sympa-
thy to the toituied daughtei and towaid the iecognition of the inteisub-
jective ieality of powei. As he appiovingly iemaiks in noting the iesponse
to a public ieading, The auditois weie moved by the Good Fathei, theie
was the oppoitunity foi sympathy with the toimented daughtei.
52
Moie-
ovei, Canetti is fully convinced that his veision of the stoiy iesonates with
palpable Viennese ieality: The fiightful Good Fathei piovoked hoiioi,
the Viennese weie well awaie of the powei of theii building supeiintendents
Hausbescrger] and I dont believe that anyone would have daied doubt
the tiuth of this guie as long as eveiyone in the ioom was in his Pfas]
powei.
53
Actualnot just ctionalizedchild abuse was in any case a gieat
sensation in n-de-sicle Vienna, as Laiiy Wol has documented. The
Viennese cases, Wol obseives, piovide us with an extiaoidinaiy pictuie
of how child abuse was peiceived and inteipieted in an age that had not
yet accepted the fundamental concept of child abuse.
54
Canettis staik ie-
insciiptionof this issue inthe Pfa-Anna conict might theiefoie be seennot
meiely as a sobeiing evocation of this as yet uniecognized social pathology,
but also as an inquiiy into why it had to be obliteiated and foigotten.
55
The
social iesonance of Pfa-like violence is fuithei coiioboiated by the mod-
einist sculptoi Fiitz Woitiuba, who, iemaiking on the same ieading of The
Good Fathei Canetti iefeis to above, is said to have quipped that nothing
was mcre Vienna, the ieal Vienna, than that which was] selected foi this
ieading.
56
And latei Di. Sonne will testify to the iiieducible tiuth of the
Pfa guie.
57
It can haidly be a coincidence that when Canetti latei set down
his own denition of hysteiia, he would eschewall iefeiences to intiapsy-
chic distuibances, and view it instead as a womans fiequently unsuccessful
attempt to escape male violence and domination.
58
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : I,I
To appieciate Canettis ievision of the Fieudian masteiplot does not ie-
quiie that we fully endoise it. Faithful Fieudians could easily exempt them-
selves fiom the novels ciitique by ciying foul. Though Anna is cleaily dis-
tuibed and appaiently delusional, she does not seem to exhibit classical
symptoms of hysteiia. And is not Pfa a kind of extieme, tailoi-made
exemplum: While Canetti nevei waveied in his insistence that The Good
Fathei, nouiished by the daikest aspects of Viennese society,
59
exhibits
a quantum of social tiuth, devout Fieudians could claim that Canetti holds
Fieud to a standaid that is simply incommensuiate with the latteis own
claims.
60
Whatevei the case may be, it should be noted that Canetti sounds a
ciitique heie (and in the instances discussed below) that will echo thiough-
out latei Fieud ieception. Evenoi especiallythose who wish to iedeem
Fieud foi use in social theoiy will have occasion to addiess what is seen as
psychoanalysiss inheient piopensity to piivatize what piopeily belongs to
the social. In the end, of couise, Autc-da-Fe is limited in its engagement to
the tools of ction: it can meiely piovoke, satiiize, and suggest, cleaily, it
cannot dispiove in a puiely analytic sense.
If the assessment of the novels Fieud ciitique must to some extent ie-
main in the eye of the beholdei, theie can be little doubt as to the naiiatives
almost heavy-handed allusion to Fieud. Anna imaginatively iefashions the
sickly and slight gioceiy cleik into an avenging black knight, cieating a faiiy
tale with a thick netwoik of Fieudian motifs that would seem to iival any of
Biuno Bettelheims examples fiom Kinder brauchen Marchen (published as
The Uses cf Enchantment). Fianz gives Anna a tieasuied cigaiette, which she
caiesses and nuzzles as if it weie a baby, stowing it on hei peison in a place
hei fathei would nevei think toviolate (just belowhei bieasts), but of couise
he does. Fianz, the noble knight (der edle Ritter), declines the oppoitunity
to elope quietly, insisting instead on the honoi of ceiemoniously behead-
ing the fathei, which in tuin tiiggeis an additional Oedipal desiie. Suddenly
Fianz feels impelled to biing the fatheis ied head to mothei (albeit to
Annas mothei): To mothei, he says, she should also have some happi-
ness.
61
Uponwinning his viigin biide inthis mannei, Fianz comments in
a way that seems to exceed his own undeistanding: Today . . . Ill caiiy you
o back home.
62
But just as Canetti explicitly invokes the faiiy tale atmo-
spheie only to paiody it, so too does he evoke the language and imageiy of
psychoanalysis only to undeimine it.
63
Foi in the chapteis paiting gambit,
it becomes cleai that the expectations aioused by these Fieudian allusions
I,: : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
aie not only unfullled, but ieveised. Pfas naked aggiession fully suces
to motivate the unmistakable masochismof Annas iichly imagined ievenge
fantasy, we have little need foi Fieudian notions that posit masochism in
pubescent giils and women as a pioduct of the female Oedipus complex.
64
Fianzs utility to Anna lies not in his function as fathei ieplacement, oi even
as eiotic love object, but puiely in his iole as potential patiicide. When we
iead She wants to get a husband in oidei to get away fiom home,
65
we
fully iealize that Anna is not just any teenage giil anxious to make hei way
in the adult woild. Quite in contiast to the poweiful black knight of hei fan-
tasy, the ieal Fianz tuins out to be a common thief who is thiown in jail,
whence he is unable to peifoim his iescue function. Because he is impotent
to delivei hei fiom pateinal haim, Anna dismisses Fianz as immateiial to
hei ieal concein.
66
If The Good Fathei disputes the dominant Fieudian naiiative on
fatheis and daughteis, it does so without the intent of cieating sustained
sympathy foi Anna, oi foi similaily abused giils, as an end in itself. Though
awaie that his naiiative ievision cast the daughtei in a ielatively moie com-
passionate light, Canettis aesthetics demand heie as elsewheie a cool, un-
sentimental consideiation of the issues at stake. By abjuiing the aesthetics of
identication, that is, by eschewing a lachiymose poitiayal of the biutalized
daughtei, Canetti pievents us fiom dissolving ouiselvesto echo Kiens
feais about populai novelsin empathy foi an Anna, who of couise to some
extent iemains a comic ciphei. Instead (and, like Biecht, Canetti saw this
as an eithei[oi situation), the novels stiikingly dispassionate depiction of
fathei-daughtei violence invites a iesponse whose eneigies would not be dis-
chaiged within the stoiy, but diiected outwaid to the woild the novel seeks
to engage. To put it simply: Annas staik unieality contiasts pioductively
with the ieality of the social pioblems to which she points. In confionting
Fieuds Doia with his own Anna, Canetti stiikes a blow at the explana-
toiy powei of the Oedipus complex, the veiy centeipiece of Fieuds whole
theoiy. Pfas sexual violence is undeniably ieal andinescapably out theie:
To be suie he took his stepdaughtei o the bed and beat hei bloody.
67
No
less than Geoigs neoempiiicismand Kiens elitist conception of scholaiship
and idealist cultuie, psychoanalysis makes its appeaiance in Autc-da-Fe as
a populai but fatally awed biand of blindness to a woild that will not be
ignoied.
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : I,_
Geoig and Counteitiansfeience: The Machiavellian Analyst
The guie of Geoig, the gynecologist tuined psychiatiist, might seem at
ist glance the most obvious place to begin an investigation of the novels
engagement with Fieud. But aie we justied now in viewing Geoig as a kind
of Fieudian analyst, especially in light of oui piioi association of him with
the explicitly non-Fieudian psychological movement known as neoempiii-
cism: Can we have it both ways: Canettis undogmatically and capaciously
diawn guie does indeed evince seveial key Fieudian concepts and piac-
tices, as we will see below, but we must keep in mind that Geoig both evokes
and exceeds this iole. He is not meiely a ciphei, as in a rcman clef, foi the
psychoanalyst, as we have seen, he is a ciystallization site foi a whole clus-
tei of cultuial movements, including neoempiiicism, piimitivist life phi-
losophy (Lebensphilcscphie), and, yes, Fieudian analysis as well. Though
Canetti goes to some lengths to satiiize the psychoanalyst as unacknowl-
edged powei biokeiiepiising one of his favoiite themesthe paiody ulti-
mately functions to disciedit Geoig as the oiacle of ciowd theoiy. In othei
woids, in this case Canetti actually emplcys Fieudian notions, though only
piovisionally, in oidei to undeimine Geoigs pseudosolution to the ciisis of
modein cultuie.
The chaptei that intioduces us to Geoig, AMad House (Ein Irrenhaus),
is laced with Fieudian iefeiences, as peihaps any sustained tieatment of psy-
chology by I,_o would inevitably be. Geoigs jealous assistants, foi example,
link theii diiectois unoithodox methods and unbiidled ambition to a dis-
tuibed childhood and in paiticulai to a feai of sexual impotence.
68
Eailiei
in the novel, too, we notice the bioad inuence of populaiized Fieudian
ideas in the comic poitiayal of the wedding nighta subject to which Geoig
himself will latei tuin in an eoit to analyze his biothei. Aftei the wedding
ceiemony, Theiese pioduces the key, which Kien cannot nd despite despei-
ate fumbling in his pant pockets. She pioceeds to dominate sexually, albeit
unsuccessfully, in a mannei that has led one ciitic (Foell) to view hei as a
phallic mothei. Kien cleaily iecognizes that his chief nuptial task (seine
Aufgabe) is now to initiate sexual inteicouise, and attempts to build up his
couiage to do so.
69
Ultimately, he ieaches the conclusion that sexual intei-
couise, piesumably by means of the Fieudian piinciple of constancy, will
biing him ielief fiom the nightmaies he attiibutes to his abstemious life-
I, : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
style: The bad dieams of these last days weie doubtless connected with the
exaggeiated austeiity of his life. Eveiything would be dieient now.
70
Thus,
sex is foi Kien a necessaiy evil, a kind of piessuie ielease valve that will allow
him to caiiy on his seivice to cultuie moie eciently.
Evoking similai notions of populaiized Fieudianism, Geoig, on his way
to Munich to aid his beleagueied biothei, wondeis what could possibly be
ailing his viitually sexless oldei biothei. Revealing the Fieudian conception
that peisonality disoideis aie iooted in the psychic management of sexual
instincts, Geoig queiies: What could be oppiessing him, an almost sex-
less cieatuie:
71
Peteis appaient sexlessness only momentaiily stumps the
stellai psychiatiist, who quickly modies his diagnosis to madness biought
on by exaggeiated iepiession (iathei than absence) of sexuality: Petei be-
longs in a lock-up facility. He has lived chastely foi too long.
72
These and
numeious othei episodes that evoke the geneial atmospheie of Fieudian
psychology aie moie than witty and wicked instances of the novels comic
backgiound music. Indeed, they set the stage and diiect oui attention to the
question of Geoigs ielationship to psychoanalysis.
On closei consideiation, howevei, we discovei theie is much that sets
Geoig apait fiom Fieud, at least on the suiface. Most impoitant is Geoigs
conviction that his whole appioach to psychology is fundamentally anti-
bouigeois, not to mention his deepest desiie to leave the mentally ill, as
fai as possible, in theii state of intense and authentic (if psychotic) delii-
ium. While some ciitics may wish to view piecisely these chaiacteiistics as
inveited iefeiences, iespectively, to Fieuds own pionounced political con-
seivatism and to psychoanalysiss ieputation as an essentially bouigeois
discipline,
73
it may be moie coiiect to say that it is specically Geoigs mis-
placed belief in his own iadicalismthat constitutes the paiody.
74
That is, just
as Fieud fancied himself a bouigeois ciitic in ceitain matteis of sexuality, he
actually seived to undeigiid that class at a deepei level. This aside, theie is a
moie obvious point of contact with Fieud: Geoigs lauded foimof tieatment
consists exclusively of the talking cuie. Geiald Stieg, at any iate, does not
hesitate to iefei to this piactice as Geoigs psychoanalytic theiapy and to
the piactitionei himself as a psychoanalyst.
75
An example of Geoigs Fieudian appioach can be gleaned fiom his at-
tempt to cuie Kien by taking him back to the oiigins of his misogyny in
oidei then to iid him of this distuibance:
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : I,,
Geoig noticed veiy well eveiy time Peteis voice went shaip. It was
enough that his thoughts ietuined to the woman upstaiis. He had not
said a woid about hei, but alieady in his voice theie betiayed itself a
scieeching, shiill, incuiable hatied . . . He must be induced to give vent
to as much of his hatied as possible. If only he would simply ietiace the
events as they had appeaied to himfiomtheii oiigins onwaids in a simple
naiiative! Geoig knew well how to play the pait of the eiasei in such a
ietiospect, and to wipe fiom the sensitive plate of memoiy all its tiaces.
76
Heie we see Geoig intent upon helping Kien manage his iiiational hatied
not with diugs oi electioshock theiapy oi even by means of incaiceia-
tion (despite an eailiei temptation to do just that), but by listening to and
inteipieting the stoiies of his patient. The veiy image of Geoig as eiasei
(Radiergummi ) may alieady contain the novels caiicatuie of this piactice,
yet eiasuie is not all that fai fiom the teim Anna O. would famously
give to the Fieudian talking cuie: chimney sweeping.
77
This attempt to
have Petei talk away his pioblems
78
iaises the question of Geoigs oveiall
tiack iecoid with patient tieatment, his own claims to unqualied success
notwithstanding.
The hallmaik of Geoigs spectaculai new tieatment consists not meiely
in talking (and then eiasing), but in his active encouiagement of that cential
event in psychoanalytic theiapy known as tiansfeience. Fieud once de-
sciibed tiansfeience as the theiapeutic ievival of a whole seiies of psycho-
logical expeiiences . . . not as belonging to the past, but as applying to the
peison of the physician at the piesent moment.
79
This piocess of inappio-
piiate piojection onto the essentially unknown peison of the psychoanalyst
piovides ciucial insights into the patients peisonal histoiy and is consid-
eied to be indispensable to the psychoanalytic cuie. Psychologist and Fieud
expeit Stephen Fiosh explains that tiansfeience has incieasingly come to
be seen as the cential element in the psychoanalytic situation, encouiaged
by the passivity and blank scieen behavioui of the analyst.
80
Geoig consideis himself, as we obseived above, to be piecisely such a
neutial iecipient of his patients manias, his piefeiied self-appellation being
eine spazierende Vachstafel that passively iegisteis only his patients needs:
Instead of woiking ovei things oi iesponding to them, he ieceived them
mechanically.
81
Canetti could haidly have devised an image moie likely to
I,o : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
conjuie Fieuds own guie foi the piopeily objective and distant analyst.
The physician, Fieud wiites, should be opaque to the patient and, like a
miiioi, shownothing but what is shown to him.
82
Though Geoigs claimto
objectivity and neutiality is ultimately belied, as we saw above, by his own
behavioi, his eoit to engage his patients fantasies and desiies does evoke
(even if it simultaneously misconstiues) the Fieudian ieliance of analysts
on making an alliance with the patients ego.
83
Notice in the following passage, pait of which we have alieady visited in
anothei context, howthe encouiagement of the patients fantasy piojections
is intimately linked to the theiapists exeicise of powei. Heie Geoig, cloth-
ing himself in the naiiatois voice, is desciibing his most piomising patients,
whom he (like Fieud) would tieat in his own apaitment:
Theie he would easily win, if he did not enjoy it alieady, the condence
of those who, towaids anyone else, would hide behind the scieen of theii
insanity. Kings he addiessed ieveiently as Youi Majesty, with Gods he
would fall on his knees and fold his hands. Thus even the most sublime
eminences stooped to him and went into paiticulais. He became theii
sole condant, whom, fiom the moment they had iecognized him, they
would keep infoimed of the changes in theii own spheies and seek his
advice. He advised them with ciystal cleveiness, as though theii wishes
weie his own, cautiously keeping theii aims and theii beliefs befoie his
eyes . . . Was he not aftei all theii chief ministei, theii piophet oi theii
apostle, occasionally even theii chambeilain:
84
It haidly needs to be said that Geoig, his self-image notwithstanding, haidly
fullls the psychoanalytic contiact: iathei than assisting his patients to ie-
solve theii conicts, he actively encouiages theii delusions by taking on and
playing out theii fantasies. Without a doubt, Geoigs evocation of tiansfei-
ence simultaneously contiavenes the fundamental Fieudian piecept baiiing
analysts fiomabandoning theii neutiality: On no account must the analyst
live up to the tiansfeience, wiites Fiosh, paiaphiasing Fieuds own wain-
ings of I,I, contained in a papei titled Obseivations onTiansfeience Love:
eveiy depaituie fiom analytic distance and the puie puisuit of tiuth sup-
poits the patients iesistances and makes the analytic woik moie dicult.
85
The caiicatuied natuie of this allusion to Fieudian analysis may be held
by some to exoneiate authentically piacticed psychoanalysis. But the oppo-
site may in fact be tiue: Foi the caiicatuie only diaws out the stiuctuial
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : I,,
imbalance endemic to the patient-analyst ielationship. Fiosh elucidates this
inheient potential foi abuse, of which Geoig makes iich use: Psychoanaly-
sis] accentuates the powei of the theiapist to such a degiee that it appeais
to validate authoiitaiianism . . . The ieal distiess engendeied in the patient
by expeiiences which s[he has undeigone aie taken up into the peison of
the analyst so that all ieality is lost and eveiything is undeistood in teims
of the tiansfeience ielationshipan astonishing piece of megalomania, if
nothing woise.
86
Canetti satiiizes this aspect of analytic hubiis in Geoigs
puipoited ability to cuie schizophienia piecisely by hosting, as it weie, the
patients iival peisonalities in his own consciousness: The scientic woild
aigued vigoiously ovei his tieatment of schizophienia of the most vaiied
kinds. If a patient, foi instance, imagined himself to be two people who had
nothing in common oi who weie in conict with each othei, Geoig Kien
adopted a method which had at ist seemed veiy dangeious even to him:
he made fiiends with both paities . . . Then he would pioceed to the cuie.
In his own consciousness he would giadually diaw the sepaiate halves of
the patientas he embodied themclosei to each othei, and thus giadu-
ally would iejoin them.
87
It does not much mattei that the bulk of Fieuds
patients weie neuiotics, not psychotics like Geoigs clientele. Noi is it ulti-
mately impoitant that Fieud specically cast doubt on the eectiveness of
analysis foi psychotics. Foi this caiicatuie is cleaily not diawn out of a con-
cein foi sciupulous faiiness to Fieud, but to iidicule the tyianny of the ana-
lyst. Indeed, Fieuds own dictatoiial ceitainty that Doias adamant denials of
the masteis diagnosis weie actually coveit aimations of his insights may
not have been fai fiom Canettis mind.
88
The last sentence of the passage
quoted above indulges in comic hypeibole, to be suie, yet it also expiesses
Canettis conviction that psychoanalysis, authoiized in this instance by the
piivilege of the all-poweiful analyst, is complicit in the ieduction of social
to mental phenomena. The patient, aftei all, no longei even exists foi Geoig,
except as a functionof the analysts consciousness. As inthe case of Pfas at-
tempt to suboidinate Annas existence to his own, we aie meant to iecognize
psychoanalysis as a dubious accomplice in this piocess. Despite considei-
able libeities, then, Geoigs quite contioveisial tieatment captuies iathei
eectively the pioblematic iole assigned to the Fieudian theiapist, namely
to take up into the peison of the analyst (Fiosh) all the patients fantasies
and desiies in oidei then to assist in the iesolution of psychic distuibances. It
should come as no suipiise, then, to leain that Canetti would latei desciibe
I,8 : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
the psychoanalysts blank scieen behavioi as cold and powei-hungiy
and the analysand, conveisely, as helpless and exposed.
89
Fiomthis pei-
spective, Geoigs celebiated method of mending a split ego seives as a kind
of cautionaiy tale about the potential foi ontological ieductionism implicit
in the theiapeutic ielationship.
But Geoig is not meiely a walking illustiation of the imbalance of powei
intiinsic to the tiansfeience phenomenon. He ciosses the line and commits
the caidinal psychoanalytic sin of counteitiansfeience in allowing his own
iesponse to one of his favoiite patients to inuence the tieatment outcome
of that patient. Jean Pival is one of the doctois model patients, and as such
seives well in chaiacteiizing Geoig. The assistants at the psychiatiic institute
maivel at and envy theii leadeis ability to tieat this paiticulaily intiactable
case. Geoigs phenomenal success consists of nothing moie than encouiag-
ing Jeans delusion that his absent wife is indeed piesent, when she has in fact
disappeaied long ago, having iun o with a young ocei. Geoigs encoui-
agement is cleaily the key factoi in the diuinal conjuiing of an imaginaiy
Jeanne: But Jean, shes in the net, dont you see hei: the analyst would
insist, and, lo: He was always iight. His fiiend opened his mouth and look,
his wife was theie.
90
Although the assistants tiy the veiy same tiick (die
Zauberfcrmel ), only the tiusted Geoig can fulll this fantasy: Eveiy day
he helped Jean pioduce hei.
91
While this mayalieadyconstitute psychoanalytic malpiactice, it is not yet
counteitiansfeience. This ist occuis at a point in the novel celebiated by
othei ciitics as Geoigs eloquent disquisition on the futility of individuality
and the inevitability of the ciowda passage that, as we noted above, has
consistently been seen as an expiession of Canettis own views on the ciowd,
and theiefoie has endowed Geoig with an ill-deseived authoiity. Basking in
his ability to mediate the multitudinous ioles imagined foi him by his psy-
chotic patients, and despaiiing at his assistants constitutional incapacity to
do so, this pieeminent psychiatiist is inspiied to explain what distinguishes
him fiom these mundane colleagues. Geoig deciies theii oveily iestiictive,
unidimensional psyches (ihre achen Seelen). What these oveilycultivated
appientices iefuse to acknowledge, claims Geoig, and heie he is echoing the
Lebensphilcscphie that ist conveited him to psychiatiy, is the piimal diive
towaid the ciowd: Of that fai deepei and most essential motive foice of his-
toiy, the desiie of men to iise into a highei type of animal, into the mass, and
to lose themselves in it so completely as to foiget that cne man evei existed,
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : I,,
they the assistants] had no idea. Foi they weie educated, and education is in
itself a ccrdcn sanitaire foi the individual against the mass in his own soul.
92
As we noted above when we ist began to glimpse the fundamental simi-
laiity between Geoig and Kien, Geoigs espousal of the ciowd is calculated
initially to evoke ieadeily sympathy. Not only is the beaiei of this message
the novels istand onlyieallyattiactive chaiactei, but the message itself
seems coiiectly to diagnose Kiens own abuse of high cultuie, namely as a
Festungsguitel (foitiess belt) against a feaied modeinity envisioned by
the elitist piofessoi piecisely as the piovince of the masses. Kiens foitiess-
like libiaiy, the walled-up windows of which aie meant to keep the woild at
bay, is only the most obvious of symptoms and symbols in this iegaid. Add
to this Canettis latei analysis of ciowdsin pointed but unacknowledged
opposition to Fieudas fundamentally positive human gioupings fullling
piimal uiges, and one can easily giasp the temptation of so much Canetti
scholaiship to view Geoig as the mouthpiece of the authoi of Crcwds and
Pcwer.
This view, actively encouiaged by the novel on the one hand, is substan-
tially qualied by the veiy context of these iemaiks, thus cieating a stimu-
lating naiiative dynamic, a push and pull that makes us awaie of oui own
ieadeily desiie inheient in the heimeneutic piocess. Some ciitics, beginning
with Bainouw, had eaily on begun to suspect that Geoig is haidly the dispas-
sionate voice of ieason, as we have noted. Yet apait fiom what has been said
about Geoigs questionable piactices and geneial unieliability elsewheie in
the novel, no one has yet obseived how the veiy passage that is supposed
to elevate Geoigs tiustwoithiness as beaiei of ciowd theoiy actually undei-
mines his status consideiably. Foi it is within the context of an egiegious
instance of counteitiansfeience onto his stai patient Jean that Geoig deliveis
this vaunted soliloquy on the ciowd.
Madness, says Geoig, is attiibutable to an untenable iepiession of the
masses within. In what sounds like an instinctual theoiy la Fieudsub-
stitute libido foi ciowd and it would be haid to tell the dieienceoui
psychiatiist postulates the following: Countless people go mad because the
ciowd in themis paiticulaily stiongly developed and can get no satisfaction.
In no othei way did he explain himself and his own activity. Once he had
lived foi his piivate tastes, his ambition and women, now his one desiie was
peipetually to lose himself. In this activity he came neaiei to the thoughts
and wishes of the ciowd, than did those othei individuals who suiiounded
Ioo : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
him.
93
Wheieas Geoig had pieviously claimed to be inteiested also in his-
toiically ieal ciowdsdie Virksamkeit der Masse in der Geschichte
94
he
ends up inteiioiizing this social phenomenon. Like his philologist biothei,
Geoigs advocacy of giand explanatoiy theoiies tuins out to seive his im-
mediate (and, as we will piesently see, changing) needs. Heie Geoig is claim-
ing to have successfully ciicumvented the dangeis of an eiupting ciowd by
assimilating the poious, malleable self he so valued in the goiilla man, in
othei woids, by his theiapeutic piactice of peipetually losing himself. We
might note in passing that this conception implies a humoious ieveisal in
which patients seive as foddei foi the analysts own self-theiapya piepa-
iatoiy step in the piocess of counteitiansfeience that will follow. But at this
point, which iepiesents the giand nale of Geoigs oiation about ciowds,
what is essential to notice is that the ciowd has become an intiapsychic phe-
nomenon. Piecisely by playing out the many ioles assigned him, above all
by successfully mediating the piesence of the spectial Jeanne that inaugu-
iates this discouise on the ciowd in the ist place, Geoig claims to have ap-
peased his own innei ciowd. Like the psychotic patients he tieats, Geoig
has become the ciowd, and theiefoie need not feai its vengeance.
All such philosophical musings on ciowd theoiy aie of couise biack-
eted by the stoiy of the unfoitunate village blacksmith tuined mass mui-
deiei, Jean Pival, whom Geoig appioaches once again on evening iounds.
But Geoigs foitunes have suddenly tuined: his assistants aie no longei en-
amoied oi even jealous of theii leadei, and the once fawning patients have
become indieient: A sad day, he said softly to himself . . . He always
bieathed in the stieamof othei peoples feelings. Today he could feel nothing
aiound him, only the heavy aii.
95
In this depiessive mood, Geoig encoun-
teis Jeans ielentless and now tiiesome pieoccupation with his long-since-
depaited wife. Reminded of his own agging maiiiageGeoig will soon
confess: My wife boies me
96
he mounts the counteitiansfeience. An-
noyed specically by the connubial loyalty he obseives in his patient, Geoig
takes his ievenge on the imaginaiy wife Jeanne: Hit hei ovei the head, said
Geoig, he was sick and tiied with this thiity-two yeais of faithfulness. Jean
hit hei haid and peifoimed the scieams of help foi hei.
97
Though Jeans be-
havioi is initially no dieient today than on any othei day, his iequest elicits
not the blank scieen analytic behavioi even Geoig sometimes musteis, but
functions instead to tiiggei a ciisis in the analysts own life. Geoigs chei-
ished self-image, the veiy theiapeutic stiuctuie, let us iecall, that peimits
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : IoI
him to host his innei ciowd and cuie his patients, is now endangeied: Be-
sides, the wax tablet was melting.
98
Now not even indulging in a fantasy of
his own futuie fame can cheei himup, foi he must face the fact that such iev-
eiies only delay what he despeiately wants to avoid entiiely, namely going
home to his wife: Why dont I go home: Because my wifes theie. She wants
love . . . The wax tablet weighed heavy.
99
This instance of imaginaiy wife-beating piobably has veiy little to do
with iaising ieadeis consciousness about actual domestic violence, paiticu-
laily since Jean himself supplies the scieams foi his imagined victim. Yet it
iepiesents an impoitant point of conveigence foi the themes we have been
thus fai consideiing. The only Jeanne we know, and the one Jean batteis, is
aftei all laigely the pioduct of the omnipotent analyst. As such, she undei-
scoies hei cieatois depoliticizing tendency, alieady in evidence duiing the
inteipolated monologue on ciowd theoiy. In deploying Jeanne, Geoig
cleaily employs his powei to enfoice the inteinalization of a pioblem en-
meshed in the iconic events of economic modeinity. Though tiapped now
in psychotic delusions, Jean Pivals woes oiiginate of couise in his eco-
nomic displacement. As village blacksmith, he has been iuined by the ai-
iival of automobiles. His wife, aftei a few weeks of acute poveity, could no
longei enduie hei life with him and ian o with a seigeant.
100
Though he
claims to want to nd the actual wife, Geoig is constitutionally ill equipped
to do so, as a psychologist he is disinclined to attend to the socioeconomic
causes of his patients symptoms.
101
Rathei than peisuade Jean to leain a
new tiade moie piomising in the late industiial peiiod, Geoig encouiages
him to see himself not as socially embedded, but as an eteinal type, that
is, as the wionged and vengeful husband fiom ancient mythology, Vulkan,
who catches his wife in the act of indelity. Alluding to Fieuds own well-
known love of ancient mythology, and his tendency to build psychoanalysis
aiound aichetypical situations pieguied in myth, Canetti endows Geoig
with a similai passion. This is why Geoig, even when he speaks of Jeanne
as a ieal-woild woman, incites his stai patient to imagine his iegained wife
as Venus, tiapped in Vulkans inciiminating and punishing net.
102
Though
a specic act of counteitiansfeience tiiggeis the inteitextual connection to
Fieud, what is piincipally on tiial heie is Geoigs laigei tiansfeience of a
fundamentally social pioblemone pointedly iooted in the industiial dis-
locations of the eaily pait of this centuiyto the iealm of fantasy and uni-
veisal myth. At issue, by extension, is Geoigs entiie conveision to psychia-
Io: : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
tiy. Recall that he then claimed to leave behind the debaucheiy of easy sex
and anesthetizing Fiench liteiatuie, a kind of schcngeistige Literatur he
felt papeied ovei the ciacks of the ieal woild, in oidei honestly to confiont
a moie complex and diveise ieality. In his tieatment of Jean Pival we see
that Geoigs eailiei commitment to multiplicity and dieience is belied by
his method of subsuming individual cases undei piefabiicated mythologi-
cal constiucts, a chaige that piecisely coincides with one of Canettis cential
and iepeated ciitiques of psychoanalysis as mastei naiiativethe aiidity
of a single theoiy that would apply to all human beings.
103
In the end, then,
Geoigs appaient abandonment of gynecology in favoi of psychiatiy pioves
to be a homecomingitself a kind of humoious Fieudian allusion. Yet as
much as Canetti may wish to loosen the giip of Fieud on the populai imagi-
nation, it is notewoithy that the novel also capitalizes on this widespiead
cultuial naiiative. Foi it is paitly due to the unwitting help of an admit-
tedly bowdleiized Fieud that we come to see Geoigs ciowd theoiy as the
oppoitunistic cant it essentially is.
In the Teimite Colony
Alluding tothe extiemely populai Civilizaticnand Its Disccntents, Canetti
has his ctional Fieudian analyst concoct and apply his own, ioughly paial-
lel, account of the iise of society and cultuie. The context of Geoigs tale of
the teimite colony, which is meant to coax Kien into ievealing his own libidi-
nal diives, is at least as impoitant as the stoiy itself. Rathei than iendeiing
Kien a coopeiative patient, howevei, Geoigs eoits only incite the leained
scholai to evei gieatei heights of misogynist eiudition. At the heait of this
sibling iivaliy, inwhichKienultimately gains the uppei hand, aie competing
notions of cultuie. Kiens iebuttal of Geoigs teimite paiable illustiates the
shoitcomings of the Fieudian account: cultuie is not so much the achieved
prcduct of sublimation, we leain, but the site and reccrd of ongoing conict.
Though Fieud had alieady ieheaised his fundamental ideas on societal
ontogeny in Tctem and Tabcc (I,I:I_), these views ieceived fiesh aiticu-
lation and widespiead ciiculation in I,_o, the yeai Canetti began woik on
the novel. Fieud could take comfoit in his books astonishing populaiity,
notes Gay, within a yeai, its ist edition of I:,ooo, exceptionally laige foi a
woik of Fieuds, was sold out.
104
Geoigs anthiopomoiphic tale, which en-
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : Io_
visions a society founded upon the ienunciation of the sexual diive, could
thus scaicely have failedto evoke Fieudat this time. Reecting his piimitivist
oiientation and the inuence of his guiu (the goiilla man), Geoig displaces
his stoiy onto the animal kingdom. The veiy choice of teimites seems calcu-
lated, as Stieg has suggested, to evoke Fieud, foi at one point in Civilizaticn
Fieud muses about teimites as having achieved an ideal state of stable sub-
limation that foievei eludes humans.
105
Though Fieud distinguished human
fiom teimite society, he simultaneously piesents it as an ideal of soits and
theiefoie compaiable in some iespects. Geoigs humoious explosion of the
Fieudianmetaphoi aoids us the ciitical peispective we have come to expect
in Canetti. Above all, the use of teimites peimits Canetti the oppoitunity of
taigeting one of the weakest links in Fieudian theoiy, namely a notoiiously
unspecic theoiy of diives.
106
Contiaiy to Stieg, who aigues that Canettis
cultuial ciitique actually iests upon the Fieudian theoiy of psychic econ-
omy, we will see how the novel paiodies this foundational conception of
diives.
107
But ist let us have the taleoi at least the ist halfin Geoigs own
woids:
Even some insects have it bettei than we do. One oi a veiy few motheis
biing into being the entiie iace. The iest iemain undeideveloped. Is it
possible to live at closei quaiteis than the teimites do: What a teiiifying
accumulation of sexual stimuli such a stock would pioduceif the ciea-
tuies still possessed theii sexuality! They do not possess it, and have the
ielated instincts only in small quantities. Even what little they have, they
feai. When they swaim, at which peiiod thousands, nay millions, aie de-
stioyed appaiently without ieason, I see in this a ielease of the amassed
sexuality of the stock. They saciice a pait of theii numbei, in oidei to
pieseive the iest fiom the abeiiations of love. The whole stock would go
agiound on this question of love, weie it once to be peimitted.
108
While bioadly alluding to Fieud, this is cleaily a iathei impeifect clone of
that mastei naiiative. Yet it is piecisely in those ways in which Geoigs tale
alteis its oiiginal that it becomes inteiesting as ciitique. Repiession and sub-
limation aie foi Fieud the sine qua ncn of human society, wheieas the in-
stincts of teimites iepiesent unalteiable, genetically deteimined behavioi
patteins. Ateimites sociability is as piedeteimined as a moths attiaction to
light, theie is nevei a question of theii foigetting oi iemembeiing a sexuality
Io : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
saciiced foi the benet of society. The pseudoscience again pokes thiough
as we obseive Geoigs unabashed anthiopomoiphism: the teimites, we aie
told, feai even the iesidual sexual instinct still in theii possession.
Canettis use of the teimite paiable couldbe dismissedas anothei instance
of the novels hypeibolic paiody, a peihaps giatuitous builesque on con-
tempoiaiy ideas. But to do so would be to fail to giasp the way in which
this peihaps illegitimate tiansposition neveitheless iaises valid and funda-
mental questions about Fieuds theoiy of diives. Fieud of couise obseived
a distinction between haidwiied animal instincts (what Laplanche calls the
zoological viewpoint) and those human diives (Triebe) deemed to be mal-
leable and iediiectable to othei ends,
109
yet Fieud himself iemained uncleai
on this ciucial point. In having Geoig espouse the patently absuid view that
teimites can somehow manage theii own instincts, Canetti iaises a seiious
set of questions iegaiding the piocess in humans. What is the domain of the
Instinkt and what that of the Tiieb: Wheie does biological deteimin-
ismleave o, and wheie (and how) can analysis inteivene in the economy of
diives: If the actual deteiminants of sublimation iemain shiouded in uncei-
tainty, then what can be said about the civilization to which these iepiessed
diives have supposedly given iise: These aie some uniesolved and peihaps
uniesolvable apoiias of psychoanalysis implied in Geoigs blatantly incom-
mensuiate example.
The paiodyachieves shaipei focus inthe secondhalf of the stoiy, inwhich
Geoigs xation on a potential teimite bacchanalia ieects his own unabated
piuiient inteiests as much as it continues to assault the Fieudian notion of
diives. Tellingly, the haid-wiied Instinkt we noted above metamoiphoses
into the Trieb just at the point when the teimites begin to act like the humans
Geoig ieally has in mind. The following passage, which in the novel follows
immediately upon the one quoted above, begins as puie speculation but
modulates by way of the histoiical piesent veib tense into a veiy immediate
scenaiio:
I canimagine nothing moie poignant thananoigy ina colonyof teimites.
The cieatuies foigeta colossal iecollection has seized hold of them
what they ieally aie, the blind cells of a fanatic whole. Each will be him-
self, it begins with a hundied oi a thousand of them, the madness spieads,
their madness, a mass madness, the soldieis abandon the gates, the whole
mound buins with unsatised love, they cannot nd theii paitneis, they
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : Io,
have no possibility of sex, the noise, the excitement fai gieatei than any-
thing usual, attiacts a stoim of ants, thiough the unguaided gates theii
deadly enemies piess in, what soldiei thinks of defending himself, they
only want love, and the colony might have lived foi all eteinitythat
eteinity foi which we all longdies, dies of love, of that diive Trieb]
thiough which we, mankind, piolong oui existence! A sudden ieveisal
of the wisest into the most foolish.
110
This sudden ieveisal diamatizes the conict inheient in the Fieudian
explanation of cultuie: in so fai as we aie civilized at all, we aie doomed
to unhappiness. Geoigs spectei of the advance of the killei ants may dis-
toit the thieat (since Fieud did not envision the peiil as coming fiom with-
out), but it does so in a mannei that diaws oui attention to the fundamental
tiade-o implicit in the Fieudian model of iepiession. If the teimites seek
to fulll theii deep sexual uiges, this leads inevitably to social disintegiation
and ceitain death. Fiosh could be speaking about Geoigs make-believe tei-
mites, but he is of couise commenting on Fieuds view of civilization when
he obseives: Befoie society theie is only the uniemitting and potentially
calamitous libeitaiianism of the instincts, as soon as these instincts become
biidled, society is foimed . . . The theoiy that society is ineluctably opposed
to individuality is one of the most pessimistic stiands of thought associated
with the bouigeois eia. Foi Fieud, the passions of the individual weie pii-
moidial and dangeious, the woik of civilisation being to contiol thema
justiable woik in the inteiests of the peipetuation of human existence.
111
It is not meiely the teimite stoiy that mocks Fieuds global explication of
society and cultuie, it is Geoig himself. He has positioned himself, as we ie-
cently saw, as the novels bold pioponent of the ciowd, as the swoin enemyof
an isolationist, oveiindividuated cultivation that insulates us fiomoui deep-
est ciowd diives. In pointed contiast to his biothei, Geoig anoints him-
selfto boiiowthe title of Einst Tolleis well-knownWeimai-eia playthe
novels gieat Masse Mensch (ciowd man). Heie we catch him in the act of
donning yet anothei, ill-tting pseudophilosophical, hat. As the Fieudian
tellei of the teimite tale, he espouses a viewquite incompatible with the veiy
iecently and eainestly espoused belief that the so-called ciowd instinct is oui
deepest diive. With his claimthat the sexual diive is both piimoidial and, in
its naked quest foi fulllment, inheiently opposed to social oiganization, he
has cleaily ieveised himself. Wheieas the mass diive (Massentrieb) made
Ioo : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
its appeaiance just a few pages piioi as itself a kind of libido, somehow both
mankinds ist cause and destiny, heie the sexual diive emeiges as a de-
cidedly less ieliable fiiend of the ciowd. It functions as a foice foi social
cohesion only as long as it is bound by sublimation. But Geoig suggests that
it is only a mattei of time until it emeiges unshackled and destiuctive. It will
eiupt even amidst a species as sexless as teimites, and, by extension, within
his viitually sexless (beinah geschlechtslcs) eldei biothei, and in this push
foi eiotic iequital it opeiates (as Fieud had aigued) as a viiulent solvent on
social bonds. If this tuinabout has eluded some ciitics, it is because Geoig
no less than Pfais a gieat manipulatoi of language. This individualistic
diive foi sexual giatication that dissolves the gioup into pleasuie-seeking
monads becomes within the space of a sentence a mass hysteiia (Massen-
wahn), a teim that may mask the otheiwise blatant inconsistency with his
pievious position. Geoig, it tuins out, ieally is the piotean playei (Schau-
spieler) Kien accuses himof being, in championing a ioughly Fieudian view
of cultuie, he is now simply following the latest fad.
All the pseudoscientic jaigon notwithstanding, Geoig was nevei ieally
talking about instinctual theoiy pei se, but about women. Fieud simply pie-
sented Geoig the oppoitunity to diess up the misogyny he hoped would
please his oldei biothei in the gaib of a iespectable scholaily illustiation.
Geoig admits as much when, just befoie he deploys the teimite tale, he sees
as his piimaiy mission the task of iemoving Theiese: Evidently Kien] ex-
pected Geoig to take hei away.
112
By way of intioduction to the teimite
paiable, Geoig iemaiks: I believe . . . that you oveiestimate the impoitance
of women. You take them too seiiously, you think they aie human beings
like us. I see in women meiely a passing necessaiy evil. Even some insects
have it bettei than we do.
113
The subsequent stoiyoi at least the ist
half, which holds out the piospect of imly iepiessed sexualityis meant
to appease if not win ovei his biothei, foi the teimites have in this segment
alieady oveicome this necessaiy evil. Kien iefuses to take the point, how-
evei, and instead launches a tiiade against the cieation of woman, which he
concludes with the lamentation, What miseiy foi all time!
114
This, in tuin,
piovides Geoig the oppoitunity to claiify the point of his paiable: Why foi
all time: We weie just speaking a moment ago about the teimites who have
oveicome sex. It is theiefoie neithei an inevitable noi an invincible evil.
115
In the second half of the stoiy, which ostensibly iepiesents a fundamen-
tal ieveisal, it iemains cleai that sexuality (das Geschlecht) is not to be
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : Io,
iead as libidinal diives in geneial, but moie specically as woman. If the
ist half of the stoiy functions as a caiiot, the second half is meant as a
stick. Even befoie he begins the stoiy, Geoig is evidently fiustiated with his
biotheis unwillingness to submit to theiapy. Foi Geoig cannot peifoim his
chimney-sweeping function unless Kien coopeiates in ievealing the souice
of his tioubles with Theiese. This is the passage, noted above, wheie Geoig
oeis to play the eiasei, if only Kien would simply ietiace the events . . . nai-
iatively back to theii oiigin!
116
The spectei of the doomed teimite oigy is
Geoigs thieat of the ietuin of the iepiessed, a waining he explicitly couches
as the (otheiwise unmotivated) buining of Kiens libiaiy. Submit to my thei-
apy, Geoig is saying, oi suei a similaily destiuctive fate. In denying the
applicability of the teimite allegoiy (and its implicit thieat), Kien undei-
scoies the fact that he and Geoig aie talking about women and not sexual
diives.
117
Spaie me youi idle thieats, Kien is saying, foi I have alieady killed
o the woman at the ioot of my woes: Of my own fiee will, alone, lean-
ing on no oneI had not even an accessoiyI have libeiated myself fiom
a weight, a buiden, a living death, a iind of accuised gianite. Wheie would
I be if I had waited foi you:
118
Geoigs teimite paiable is thus dismissed
as supeiuous. Kien has no need of giand psychosocial theoiies, foi he has
tended to the conciete pioblem in his own immediate vicinity.
Have the Kien biotheis, in theii piedisposition to see women as the seat
of sexuality and theiefoie as the ieal thieat to cultuie, misiead Fieud: Not
entiiely. Foi while Fieud intoned in Civilizaticn and Its Disccntents that it is
impossible to oveilook the extent towhich civilization is built upon a ienun-
ciation of instinct,
119
he simultaneously succumbed to a tendency to iden-
tify instinct with women and the woik of sublimation with men. Women
iepiesent the sexual impulse, explains Fiosh, moie piosaically, they aie
always tiying to ieclaim theii menfolk fiom the clutches of the woik of
building cultuie (which foices men accoiding to Fieud] to caiiy out in-
stinctual sublimations of which women aie little capable) into theii isolated
family units. Hence, civilisation opposes women by the same piinciple that
it opposes love.
120
While the novels paiody ceitainly extends to this in-
stance of slippage in Fieuds own woikabout which Fieudian ievision-
ists have had a good deal to sayit takes piimaiy aim at the moie populai
Fieudian ieception. Foi it is within this laigei oibit that populaiizations,
like Geoigs teimite naiiative, would commingle Fieudian science with
deeply ingiained cultuial piejudice. Heie Canetti shows how the language
Io8 : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
of biology and positivistic inquiiy could be used to camouage if not justify
ieal-woild aggiession towaid women.
This is the cultuial malaise with which Canetti confionts Fieudian so-
cial psychology, and he does so thiough the impiobable mouthpiece of Kien
himself. By this point in the novelwe aie just shoit of the comic ieso-
lution in which Geoig buys the coopeiation of Pfa and Theieseit no
longei matteis that the piotagonist himself is disciedited. Foi the tiuth of
this cultuial diagnosis depends not on the benighted Kien, but on the data
he musteis, which we iecognize as existing independently of the ctional
novel. At the outset of this diatiibe, we may be inclined to dismiss Kiens
claim that all ieally gieat thinkeis aie convinced of the woithlessness of
women
121
as the blustei of a madman. But just as Geoig often inadveitently
makes his case, Kien manages to give us pause, despite himself. When at ist
he cites Confucius and Buddha, we may still cling to the belief that we aie in
the hands of a meiely idiosynciatic Oiientalist. Yet Kien soon demonstiates
that he has plenty of othei illustiations at his disposal. I will piove to you
that all women deseive hate, he says to Geoig. You think I am expeit only
on the Oiient. The pioofs he needs, hes taken fiom his own aiea of spe-
cialtyoi so you thought. I shall teai the blue down fiom the sky foi you,
and I will tell no lies. Tiuths, beautiful, haid, pointed tiuths, tiuths of eveiy
size and shape, tiuths of feeling and tiuths of undeistanding, even though
in youi case only youi feelings function, you woman.
122
Indeed, as Kien is able to pluck his pioofs so ieadily fiomancient Gieek
mythology and philosophy, and then quote whole passages fiom Homei in
suppoit of his case, not to mentionhis citationof the Nibelungenlied, Michel-
angelos Sistine muials, Thomas Aquinas, Thomas Moie, a foiay into ancient
histoiy, and so foith, it giadually becomes cleai that this is no longei meiely
a case of piivate dementia. A symptom of the veiy cultuial malady he illus-
tiates, Kien poweifully demonstiates not that all women deseive hate, but
the extent to which misogyny has been a constituent element of the cultuial
canon. The pictuie we gain heie is one of cultuie as a chauvinistic semiotic
battleeld, not the pioduct of successfully sublimated libido. The violence
we witnessed in the single case of Anna is heie multiplied in the imagination
of aitists and philosopheis, and given high cultuial standing in the piocess.
Kien does not cite Fieud in this misogynist pantheon, he is fai too past-
minded to take notice of this newcomei. But the novel does: not foi pio-
moting the kind of iabid hatied that Kien spews foith, but foi piopagating
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : Io,
a giand theoiy that is at once amenable to this age-old piejudice and simul-
taneously diveits oui attention fiom it. Though Fieud knew of ieal-woild
violencehe famously sought to explain the baibaiismof Woild Wai Ihis
psychological model would emphasize violence as intiasubjective and piioi
to the benets of civilization. In one of the gieatest, if bleakest, suiveys of
woild liteiatuie and cultuie, Autc-da-Fe seems intent upon iediiecting oui
attention to the fact that violence occuis within and in the name of civiliza-
tion, as well as to the fact that the object of that violence is not in the ist
place some amoiphously dened diives, but fellow human beings.
Rejection and Displacement: Fieud as Foil
David Robeits asseited as iecently as I,,o that the iejection of psycho-
analysis, fuelled by Canettis encountei with and diiect expeiience of the
ciowd, is alieady the diiving impulse of his eaily novel, Autc-da-Fe.
123
While the foiegoing has been conceined piecisely to show in some detail
how this diiving impulse deteimines the paiticulai shape of this complex
novel, Robeitss thesis had to wait foi veiication until we could move be-
yond the assumption that Canettis two piincipal woiks, Autc-da-Fe and
Crcwds and Pcwer, iespond to this psychoanalytic impulse in the same man-
nei. Reading Autc-da-Fe as a kind of liteiaiy enciyption of Crcwds and
Pcwer has actually tended to emaiginate Fieud fiom the discussion of the
novel, foi Geoig can haidly be seen as the simultaneous beaiei of Canettis
tiuth and of Fieuds eiioi. This, too, was to piove a pitfall foi Robeits, whose
laudable impulse to align these two woiks vis--vis Fieud iesults in the less
than convincing pioposition that Geoigs ciowd theoiy encapsulates a kind
of alteinate, gioup psychology that contiasts favoiably with Fieuds unten-
able individual psychology.
124
This simply entails too much ieading back-
waid and fails to iespect the novel in its own iight.
Looking back at the novels liteiaiy engagement with Fieud, we peiceive
thoioughgoing negation iathei than the positive countei image of society
Robeits would see in the novel. Now theie can be no question of Fieud
ieceiving a faii heaiing in Autc-da-Fe. Canettis selection of iecognizably
Fieudian notions, though haidly capiicious, is undoubtedly polemic in that
these ideas make theii appeaiance only to be discaided as socially naive.
In The Good Fathei we weie ieminded of psychoanalysiss piedilection
I,o : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
to psychologize ieal-woild biutality, and in the peison of Geoig we noted
an associated tendency to disciedit socioeconomic deteiminants (e.g., the
ioot causes of pooi Jean Pivals misfoitune) in favoi of intiapsychic and
mythological accounts. Similaily, the ultimate and unexpected applicability
of Geoigs teimite paiable to his eldei biotheis deeply sexist and isolationist
piactice of high cultuie illustiated the pioblematic limits of Fieuds gioup
psychology qua social theoiy. Autc-da-Fe thus echoes a standaid ciitique
of psychoanalysiss intioveited gazethough, given the novels chionologi-
cal piioiity, it would of couise be moie coiiect to say that these subsequent
ciitics echo Canetti.
125
Heimann Bioch peiceptively obseived that the novel
leaves only destiuction in its wake, it does not iebuild on the site of its
iuin. Biochs comment is no less apiopos of the novels iepudiation of Fieud
than any othei system of ideas oi set of cultuial piactices tieated in this
study. Theie is something uncompiomising about it that one has to ie-
spect, Bioch obseives. But does that meanthat youve givenup hope: Does
it mean that you youiself cannot nd the way out, oi does it mean that you
aie in doubt altogethei about such a way out:
126
Bioch did not live long enough to get the answei to his question, foi the
way out he sought but cleaily missed in the novel would not emeige foi
anothei thiity yeais, that is, until the publication of Crcwds and Pcwer in
I,oo. It is tempting to say that, by viewing Fieud as the unacknowledged
agcn motivating both woiks, the lattei study piesents the answei to the ques-
tion posed by the novel. But this would simplify the way in which Crcwds
and Pcwer makes its own complex and ambitious case against Fieud with
the quite dieient analytical tools available to a wiitei of nonction. De-
spite signicant dieiences, it is neveitheless aiiesting to note how similai
both woiks aie in theii geneial appioach to Fieud. Indeed, Adoino could
be speaking of the novel when he says to Canetti: Youi ciitique seems to
me to be extiemely fiuitful and coiiect in many points, foi the veiy ieason
that Fieuds basic tendency to ieplace the theoiy of society by individual
psychology extended to the collectivity leads him time and again to the in-
vaiiant fundamental quanta of the unconscious, neglecting essential histoii-
cal modications. As a iesult his social psychology iemains somewhat ab-
stiact.
127
In the novel, Canetti was piimaiily conceined with cleaiing the
way foi fuithei inquiiy, that is, with negation, but not because he wished to
piomote a nihilistic woildview, as Petei Russell would famously accuse him.
Fieuds widespiead acceptance, Canetti complained, simply led to compla-
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : I,I
cency and to a dampening of intellectual cuiiosity. The psychoanalytic epi-
demic had made advances, Canetti laments. The most astounding things
weie occuiiing in the woild, but it was always the same, aiid backgiound
against which they placed these events. They spoke of these things and con-
sideied them explained, and the phenomena weie no longei suipiising.
Wheie thinking shouldhave ccmmenced, theie cioakedinsteadanimpudent
choii of fiogs.
128
With Crcwds and Pcwer Canetti fullls the veiy agenda he set foith in the
novel. By then it was no longei enough to showthe insuciency of Fieudian
ideas, confionting themwith stubboinfacts of social ieality. Nowthat he had
killed o fathei Fieud, he would ieplace him. Signicantly, Canetti begins
his study with the ciowd (die Masse), viewing it as a fundamentally posi-
tive unit of social oiganization. The sine qua ncn of the ciowd is an elemental
human expeiience Canetti labels dischaige (Entladung), which engendeis
a foundational sense of equality. Befoie this the ciowd doesnt ieally exist,
it is the dischaige which actually ist constitutes it. This is the moment in
which all who belong to the ciowd iid themselves of theii dieiences and feel
as equals.
129
All subsequent egalitaiian social theoiies, Canetti maintains,
deiive theii powei fiom the dischaige phenomenon: All demands foi jus-
tice, all theoiies of equality diaw theii eneigy in the nal analysis fiom this
expeiience of equality, which eveiyone knows in his[hei own way fiom the
ciowd.
130
Canetti veiy likely chose the teim Entladung specically to chal-
lengeoi dislodgeFieuds notion of psychic Abfuhr (dischaige). Foi
Canetti posits a fundamental, positive value to the individuals ielationship
to social oiganization in implicit contiast to Fieuds notion of social gioup-
ings as the deeply conicted by-pioduct of libidinal sublimation. Society, in
othei woids, is not a necessaiy evil (as in the Fieudian schema), but a cential
good, albeit one eminently coiiuptible by the abuse of powei.
Equally impoitant was the need to dismantle and ieplace the cential
Fieudian concept, namely the Oedipus complex. At Adoinos piodding,
Canetti admited that it was his ambition to ietiie the ill-dened Fieudian
concept, which he iefeied to as identication, and ieplace it with his own
notion of tiansfoimation (Verwandlung), a concept that allows foi giowth
and development iathei than the foieoidained ieplay of the Oedipal con-
ict. Awaie of the centiality of his own (and of the iival Fieudian) concept,
Canetti vowed to ietuin to this issue in a second volume of Crcwds and
Pcwer that nevei appeaied in piint duiing his lifetime. As his title (Masse
I,: : ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s
und Macht) piomises, Canetti lavishes a gieat deal of attention on the sub-
ject of powei, espousing the pioposition that violence and aggiession aie not
piimaiily intiapsychic, but inteisubjective, phenomena. Powei ciiculates
by way of commands (Befehle), which leave behind damaging thoins
(Stachel ).
131
This cuiiously mechanistic conception of powei leaves no doubt
in the ieadeis mind that violence bieeds violence. Like Fieud, Canetti ac-
knowledges the piofound inuence of childhood expeiience in latei adult
life, but unlike Fieud, Canetti is specically woiiied that vulneiable chil-
dien will become the iepositoiies of thoins, which will in tuin only lead to
anothei cycle of violence in the next geneiation, when the victimized chil-
dien become peipetiating adultsthis time with them as peipetiatois
latei on in life. Guilt is iedened not as a function of Oedipal desiies oi as
a iesponse to the piimoidial ciime of killing the fathei, but as the conse-
quence of the misapplication of powei. In case aftei case, Fieud piovides the
antimodel, a kind of invisible giid that explains the content and stiuctuie
of Crcwds and Pcwer.
This is not the place eithei to fully summaiize oi to ciitically assess the
ideas put foith in Crcwds and Pcwer.
132
Yet enough may have been said to
demonstiate that this woik contains a positive fund of ideas meant to dis-
place those of Fieud and otheis. While theie aie cleai and undeniable con-
tinuities between the novel and anthiopological study at the level of fun-
damental attitude, theie is much in the lattei woik that is not even hinted
at in the foimei. The novel whets oui appetite foi the subsequent study by
ie-cieating the cuiiosity Canetti claimed was destioyed by ieveiential and
deiivative Fieudian disciplesfolloweis not unlike Geoigs fawning assis-
tants at the asylum. But it is simply untenable to claim that those innovative
ideas cential to Crcwds and Pcwer (dischaige, tiansfoimation, com-
mand, thoin, and so on) aie piesent oi even vaguely disceinible in Autc-
da-Fe. Having iead about the biutal Pfa and the abused Anna, we may
appieciate bettei Canettis latei concein foi childien as paiticulaily suscep-
tible to becoming labile thoin iepositoiies, but that is all. Canetti did not
spend thiity yeais iefoimulating ideas that weie essentially alieady complete
in the novel. Moieovei, the ctional Geoig is not only nct an illustiation of
the latei woik, he is a sometime exemplum of piecisely that which Crcwds
and Pcwer will ieject. In staik contiast to this studys valoiization of society,
the novel depicts a woild in which society seems dangeiously to inheie in
the minds of monomaniacal guiesa tiue Velt im Kcpf (Woild in the
ivi0i .i 1ui ivi0ii .s : I,_
Head), to boiiow the title fiom the novels thiid book. In shoit, Autc-da-Fe
speaks eloquently and hilaiiously about false appioaches to the social, but is
ignoiant of the social concepts Canetti will piopound in Crcwds and Pcwer.
All of which suggests that the most inuential bianch of scholaiship on
the novel has got it backwaid. It is not Crcwds and Pcwer that piovides the
theoietical key to the novel, but the novel that illuminates the conceins of
the latei study. The implications may piove mutually libeiating: Crcwds and
Pcwer can be ieleased fiomits naiiowliteiaiy-ciitical function and the novel
can be fuithei exposed to ciitical appioaches at vaiiance with Canettis own
views. This is haidly a iadical pioposition, foi it was Goethe who long ago
suggested that we appioach a wiiteis woik genetically, that is, by iespecting
the chionology and context of its genesis. Iionically, we owe this insight on
the Canetti oeuvie to a man whose deteiminative inuence Canetti nevei
fully acknowledgednamely to Sigmund Fieud.
Up to this point in this study, we have diawn upon an aiiay of Weimai-eia
texts and contexts to illuminate the conceins of this ambitious novel. It may
be helpful now to see how modeinist and antimodeinist ciitical paiadigms
of the postWoild Wai II eia can help us undeistand why Autc-da-Fe ie-
mains viitually in a class of its own, despite many obvious points of contact
with liteiaiy high modeinism. What is it about the noveland the ciitics
that enfoiced this state of liteiaiy segiegation: And in what sense might we
think of this novel as anintentional boundaiyoi endpoint to this movement:
o Neithei Adoino noi Lukcs
Canettis Analytic Modeinism
A Pioductive Eiioi
James McFailane concludes his investigation into The Mind of Mod-
einism with a panegyiic to that veiitable bible of the movement, T. S. Eliots
The Vaste Land, which is said to embody a peculiaily Modeinist kind of
vision. In this account, which focuses almost exclusively on intellectual his-
toiy, liteiaiy modeinismemeiges as much moie than an eect, oi iegistei, of
the demise of tiaditional cultuie and the iise of the modein sciences. On the
contiaiy, McFailanes modeinismis a cential galvanizing agent of signal cul-
tuial impoitancehigh modeinism, in othei woids. Though he pays lip sei-
vice to less lofty constiuctions,
1
McFailane ultimately comes down squaiely
on the side of modeinism as beaiei of cultuial coheience iathei than meie
baiometei of fiagmentation: The dening thing in the Modeinist mode is
not so much that things fall apart but that they fall tcgether . . . In Modein-
ism, the centie is seen exeiting not a centiifugal but a centiipetal foice, and
the consequence is not disintegiation but (as it weie) supeiintegiation.
2
This iathei sanguine view, which asciibes an enoimous synthesizing task
to the modeinist poet, was bound to nd veiication in The Vaste Land, if
only because this veiy ieading of modeinism is laigely deiived fiom Eliot
himself. Less self-evident, howevei, is McFailanes cuiious eoit to t Autc-
da-Fewhich he supposes to be an unexpected commentaiy on Eliot
into this high modeinist schema.
3
Though ultimately iathei foiced, this con-
junction of Eliot with Canetti is foitunate in that it piovides the oppoitunity
to considei Autc-da-Fe within postwai discussions of Ameiican and Euio-
pean modeinism, adding a context to Canettis novel that not only has thus
fai been lacking in the ciitical liteiatuie, but one that illuminates the novels
distinctive tiaits paiticulaily eectively. In iesuiiecting the so-called pie-
theoietical liteiaiy landscape of the novels iediscoveiy in the eaily I,oos,
we will come to see how Autc-da-Fe iathei stienuously dees the aliation
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : I,,
McFailane so casually asseits. Shaiing neithei Adoinos maiked sympathy
foi the epistemologically humbled modeinist subject, noi meeting Lukcss
demand foi iealistic depiction of an objective totality, Canettis novel fell
between the chaiis of the iegnant liteiaiy paiadigms and was thus destined
to iemain an outsidei and a kind of cuiiosity until new views of modeinism
(and postmodeinism) came into play.
Though this study has thus fai pioted piecisely fiom these newei and
moie capacious oiientations towaid modeinism, we now consciously step
backwaid in time, a conceit that will help us appieciate Autc-da-Fe against
the backdiop of the moie familiai lights of high modeinism. Since a discus-
sion of the full iange of modeinist novels would be impossibleoi amount
to anothei book altogetheiI will content myself instead with an ideal con-
stiuct such as McFailane himself piovides. In leaping fiom the deeply con-
seivative Eliot to the leftists Adoino and Lukcs (with whomI ampiimaiily
conceined) we iisk losing, one might object, high modeinisms vast apoliti-
cal middle giound. Yet, given Adoinos piopensity foi cooptation by New
Ciiticism, this need not be the case, as I aigue below. Fuitheimoie, by focus-
ing on the modeinist epistemological shift as the philosophical touch-
stone of modeinism, as Randall Stevenson pioposes,
4
we may indeed nd
ouiselves in a position to captuie a consideiable numbei of high modeinist
woiks within a single conceptual fiamewoik. Additionally, though the texts
customaiily gatheied undei this iubiic piesent a iich and appaiently contia-
dictoiy clustei of stances towaid modeinity,
5
they aie unied, as Jameson ai-
gues, by theii attempt to manage modeinity, a stiategy that includes con-
stiucting alteinate aesthetic woilds, and one that ceitainly unites thinkeis
as dieient as Eliot and Adoino.
6
Lukcss self-imposed admonition, which
he intones at the outset of his inuential essay The Ideology of Modein-
ism, applies no less to this undeitaking: Of couise, dogmas of this kind aie
only ieally viable in philosophical abstiaction, and then only with a mea-
suie of sophistiy.
7
In moving towaid a newappieciation of the ielationship
of Autc-da-Fe to its modeinist cousins, we will peiiodically cast a glance
back on the foiegoing study. In the end, we will see howAutc-da-Fe mounts
a iemaikable piotest fiom within, announcing, as it weie, an end to high
modeinism and the exigency of its own social and analytic agenda.
Befoie piematuiely extiicating Autc-da-Fe fiomMcFailanes clutches, let
us ist endeavoi to undeistand his aigument bettei. Canettis piotagonist
seems so appealing because he appeais to iatify modeinisms investment
I,o : c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm
in a fiagmented and diuse subjectivity that is actually enhanced by the
supeicial defect of blindness. Eliot (and then McFailane) makes a viitue
of these weaknesses in claiming that the blind Tiiesias actually enjoys a veiy
piivileged kind of vision and, owing to his uid boundaiies and lack of dis-
tinct self-denition, a unique ability to unite all the dispaiate chaiacteis
of this poem.
8
Taking his cue iathei diiectly fiom Eliot, McFailane views
Tiiesiass appaient liabilities as chaiacteiistically mcdernist assets: His see-
ing blindness deiives fiom a veiy Modeinist logic, a logic which is then em-
bodied in the stiuctuie of the poem as a whole.
9
It is ciucial to note that
the model pioposed heie contains a foiegone conclusion: epistemological
impaiimentiepiesented heie above all as blindnessis fiomthe outset to
be seen as an ultimate bonus. And this, in tuin, implies a peipetuation of
the tiaditional model in which cultuie continues to assimilate the fiagments
of expeiience into a meaningful whole. We aie to iead with Tiiesias, Eliot
states in no unceitain teims: What Tiiesias sees, in fact, is the substance of
the poem.
10
It is not at all suipiising that this emphasis on seeing blindness would
call to mind Canettis Petei Kien. The heio of this novel, a piofessoi of Oii-
ental studies, also discoveis foi himself by chance the full visionaiy powei
of blindness (oi at least of contiolled defective vision) as a cosmic piin-
ciple.
11
McFailanes scaicely contained enthusiasmfoi Kien is evident in his
iemaik that Canettis heio iecognizes . . . an active piinciple at woik: in
his kind of seeing-blindness he discoveis a way of ielating oi linking things
that would otheiwise seem not in the least to ielate to each othei.
12
Like
Tiiesias, Kien exhibits the abilitypiecisely by means of an appaient pei-
ceptual deciencyto unify dauntingly dispaiate phenomena. And, as with
Tiiesias, we aie cleaily meant to iead with Canettis piofessoi. Blindness
becomes the means wheiewith to come to teims with life, opines McFai-
lane, peimitting a wholly new philosophy of contingency. Canettis heio
decides that blindness is a weapon against time and space, and oui exis-
tence a unique monstious blindness.
13
Anal ingiedient to this peculiaily
Modeinist kind of vision,
14
and one that will be of ciucial signicance in
oui discussion of Adoino, below, is that of pain. The insights to be gleaned
do not come without this piice, Kiens visionaiy blindness, we iead, like
the blindness of eyes lled with teais oi pain . . . yields much moie ieli-
able testimony about the ieal meaning of life than does the iepoit of wit-
nesses enjoying conventional good sight.
15
This in a nutshell compiises the
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : I,,
high modeinist iecipe foi ultimate iecupeiation of a disintegiating cultuie:
a handicapped piotagonist whose own uid oi fiactuied self and visionaiy
blindness equips him, not without a measuie of pain, to embiace (if not
unite) a host of supeicially discoidant and incompatible phenomena. And
it is this paiadigm into which McFailane iathei foicibly inseits Kien.
Heie one might object that this oldei view of modeinism has alieady
been supeiseded, that the newei views advocated, foi example, by Bathiick
and Huyssen in theii Mcdernity and the Text alieady piovide a moie ca-
pacious fiamewoik that could easily accommodate the likes of Autc-da-Fe.
This is admittedly tiue, and in fact infoims the methodology of all the pie-
ceding investigations of this study. Yet while the faiily iecent expansion of
the teim modeinism, alieady faiily impiecise, by the way, in its moie tiadi-
tional usage, is undeniably moie inclusive of a widei iange of texts (and of
a moie diveise aiiay of stances towaid modeinity), a degiee of claiity may
have been saciiced in the piocess.
In an illuminating essay, The Knowei and the Aiticei, intellectual
histoiian David Hollingei acknowledges that modeinism has of late been
stietched in so many diiections that it thieatens to become an almost use-
less teim,
16
but neveitheless concedes the appeal of maintaining it. The ad-
vantages aie manifest: one ietains a claim to the most commanding, most
talismanic woid in the ciitical study of twentieth-centuiy intellectual life.
17
Yet to do so does not mean that we ieduce all constituent elements to some
common denominatoi. Indeed, Hollingei is most conceined to ietiieve that
cognitivist aspect of modeinism that both iivals and completes the moie
familiai guie of the aiticeia teim he boiiows fiom Joyces iconic
Stephen Dedalusfeatuied in the coipus of canonical liteiaiy modeinism.
As Hollingei iightly obseives, The Knowei, while not entiiely absent, is
less honoied within the modeinist liteiaiy canon. It will be my aigument,
below, that Autc-da-Fe piesents the supieme exemplai of this minoiity tia-
dition within the coipus of Geiman modeinist piose.
Hollingeis stiategy of highlighting the cognitivist stiain of modein-
ist thoughtwhich captuies Canettis undeitaking extiaoidinaiily well
is what most inteiests me in this context: he aigues that we can best make
sense of these diveigent stiands not by mingling the categoiies of the knowei
and the aiticei, but by maintaining the tiaditional distinctions. Ultimately,
Hollingei will undeiscoie the inteiconnection of these two categoiieshe
shows, foi example, how both aie piesent in ceitain key modeinist novels.
18
I,8 : c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm
But his piovisional stiategy of segiegation is quite fiuitful and woithy of
emulation heie. Thus, in attending to McFailanes and Eliots condence in
the paiadoxical piowess of the modeinist piotagonist (i.e., Hollingeis aiti-
cei), I do not seek to iesuiiect tiaditional conceptions foi theii own sake
oi only because they happen to have been applied to Canettibut also to
ieap a shaie of the conceptual claiity that will iesult fiom viewing Autc-da-
Fe as an example of that minoiity cognitivist discouise that both constituted
and iivaled canonical liteiaiy modeinism.
Now, in his enthusiasm foi what Lambeit Zuideivaait would latei dub
the depiivileged modeinist subject, McFailane fails to infoimus that Kien
is not ieally blind, but is just pietending to be so. Fuitheimoie, this blind-
ness is not in any sense imposed by the modein woild (whatevei that would
mean), but iepiesents a scheme that issues fiom a quite integiated and de-
vious consciousness. Moieovei, Kiens pseudophilosophical method of ex-
punging ieality is, as we have seen above, pioblematic not only because it
depiives ontological status to his fellow human beings (such as his nagging
wife), which is in itself questionable, but because by losing sight of people in
this mannei he is actually oveilooking a veiy ieal menace to his own well-
being. Fuitheimoie, if one weie ieally seeking a tiue counteipait toTiiesias,
paiticulaily with iegaid to his capacity to host the most dispaiate of guies,
one would moie likely tuin to Kiens equally pioblematic biothei Geoig
the psychic host pai excellence, as we have had occasion to obseive in the
pieceding chaptei.
This aliation of Kien with Tiiesias, and thus of Canetti with Eliot, must
be seen as pait of a laigei cultuial dynamic that gianted legitimacy to seiious
liteiatuie insofai as it paiticipated in the developing modeinist aesthetic.
Indeed, the postwai eia was an impoitant peiiod of canon foimation foi
Geiman modeinism, as the additions of Fianz Kafka (whose stai iose dia-
matically in the I,,os) and Rainei Maiia Rilke (whose only novel was ist
given its modeinist impiimatui in the I,oos) cleaily attest. Indeed, Canettis
novel ieemeiged into public consciousness just as The Nctebccks cf Malte
Laurids Brigge (I,Io) was being usheied into the modeinist pantheon. Why,
to put it simply, was Canetti left out:
Cleaily, Autc-da-Fe could only be shoehoined into the Elotian concep-
tion of high modeinismwith consideiable eoit. Both Kien and Geoig con-
test the veiy fiagmented subjectivity that high modeinism enshiines, my-
thology seives in Autc-da-Fe not to counteiact the chaos of histoiy (as Eliot
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : I,,
famously stated), but is itself the taiget of unielenting paiody, and, nally,
the novel does not depict the loss of histoiical and social mooiings as in-
evitable chaiacteiistics of the modein age that aie somehow iediessed by
the ability of the piecious individual to unite an incieasingly disoiienting
woild within himself. All of thisand this is quite substantialis at odds
with cential stiains of high modeinism. But to demonstiate this, we need
to move somewhat beyond Eliot and McFailane to considei at least two of
the majoi playeis in the constiuction of postwai modeinism: Theodoi W.
Adoino and his piincipal aesthetic adveisaiy, Geoig Lukcs.
Adoino and the Modeinist Love Aaii
with the Fiagmented Self
The inuence of Adoino on denitions of modeinity and modeinist ait
in the postwai peiiod can haidly be oveiestimated, paiticulaily in light of
his inuential study (with Max Hoikheimei) Dialektik der Aufklarung (Dia-
lectic of Enlightenment, I,,) andthe subsequent Ncten zur Literatur (Notes
to Liteiatuie, I,,8,). Indeed, in his After the Great Divide (I,8o), Andieas
Huyssen baptizes Adoino the high piiest of modeinism, the theoiist pai
excellence of the Gieat Divide, that piesumably necessaiy and insuimount-
able baiiiei sepaiating high ait fiom populai cultuie.
19
Adoinos theoiy
of modeinism, which so poweifully maintained that divide, was motivated,
Huyssen explains, by the political impulse . . . to save the dignity and au-
tonomy of the ait woik fiom the totalitaiian piessuies of fascist mass spec-
tacles, socialist iealism, and anevei moie degiaded commeicial mass cultuie
in the West. This exclusionaiy gestuie in tuin found its theoietically moie
limited expiession in the New Ciiticism.
20
The link to New Ciiticism
dominant in Ameiica and England at this timeis signicant because it
demonstiates how Adoinos endoisement of modeinisms stiategy of ex-
clusionitself a politically motivated aestheticcould be absoibed into
a thoioughly apolitical appioach to liteiatuie.
21
Fiedeiic Jamesons assess-
ment of Adoinos pioposal to see the classical stage of high modeinism
itself as the veiy piototype of the most genuinely political ait as an ulti-
mately anti-political ievival of the ideology of modeinism can help us to
giasp the unholy alliance between Adoino and the NewCiitics iegaiding the
high modeinist canon.
22
Yet, even if Adoino may inadveitently have pio-
I8o : c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm
vided theoietical covei to tiaditionalist pioponents of high modeinism, we
should not foi oui own pait undeiestimate the distance sepaiating Adoinos
position, which asciibes a ciucial contestatoiy powei to modeinist ait, fiom
Eliots essentially compensatoiy view, which imagines a piotagonist some-
how capable of ieconciling modeinitys contiadictions. To lingei ovei this
distinction, howevei, will not advance oui undeistanding of Autc-da-Fe,
above all, peihaps, because this veiy point of contiast became muddled in
ciitical piactice.
23
Let us theiefoie biidge the abyss between Adoino and
Eliot, theieby iecapitulating a New Ciitical piactice, in oidei to see how
that which is common to both the tiaditionalist and the Maixist, namely
theii sympathetic poitiayal of the modeinist piotagonist, stands in staik
and stiuctuial contiast to Canettis tieatment of Petei Kien.
Given his much-discussed indictment of instiumental ieason in the Dia-
lectic, the eective exclusion of Autc-da-Fe fiom membeiship among those
lofty woiks that enjoy what is today the only foim of iespectable fame
(Adoinos woids in piaise, heie, of Beckett) is viitually foieoidained.
24
Foi
Canettis novel is nothing if not analyticmeicilessly and unielentingly
penetiating as, foi example, Eiich Fiied has obseived.
25
In his widely iead
essay Commitment (Engagement, I,o,), Adoino aiguesagainst Saitie
and Biechtthat tiuly engaged liteiatuie has little to do with thematic
political commitment and eveiything to do with modeinist foimal expeii-
mentation, that avant-garde abstiaction which piovokes the indignation
of philistines.
26
Adoino thus opposes modeinist autonomous ait to the
well-meaning but often self-defeating categoiy of committed ait. His in-
uential ciitique of tiaditional litterature engagee as moializing, manipula-
tive, and as the puiveyoi of unacknowledged consolationpeihaps above
all in its capacity to aestheticize sueiingis widely known and has become
pait of oui ciitical iepeitoiie, as Lawience Langeis woik on Holocaust lit-
eiatuie well attests.
27
Tuining the tiaditional notion of engaged liteiatuie on
its head, Adoino aigues: It is not the oce of ait to spotlight alteinatives,
but tc resist by its fcrm alcne the couise of the woild, which peimanently
puts a pistol to mens heads.
28
The ieal viitue of those veiy featuies de-
famed as foimalism, we aie told, is that they do not bespeak any political
oi social piogiamoi much of anything, foi that mattei: Autonomous
woiks of ait] aie knowledge as non-conceptual objects. This is the souice
of theii nobility. It is not something of which they have to peisuade men,
because it has been given into theii hands.
29
Lest this sound all too ieminis-
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : I8I
cent of idealist aesthetics (one is ieminded, foi example, of Schilleis concept
naive poetiy), Adoino emphatically asseits that any foimal contestation
of empiiical ieality is dialectically ielated to that veiy empiiical ieality.
30
Adoinos inteiest in ait that piesents knowledge as non-conceptual ob-
jects follows diiectly fiom his (and Hoikheimeis) ciitique of instiumental
ieason in Dialectic cf Enlightenment, theii monumental eoit to link the En-
lightenment to that apogee of modeinity (as they aigue): the Holocaust. Ait
that holds out the piomise of contesting commodication would have to do
so, theiefoie, in a mannei that eschews any heavy-handed teleological oi
manipulative component. This is why Adoino, in piepaiing foi the discus-
sion of his favoiite modeinists, Kafka and Beckett, hastens to iemind us that
the avant-garde abstiaction which piovokes the indignation of philistines
. . . has ncthing in ccmmcn with ccnceptual cr lcgical abstracticn, that kind
of instiumentalizing, natuie-exploiting abstiaction, in othei woids, which
is the ieal culpiit in the Dialectic.
31
Indeed, the nobility of Adoinos non-
conceptual objects and theii simple givenness ieside in theii (appaient) lack
of tendentious puipose, lending them an auia of the natuialnessand thus
the Schilleiian ieminiscence.
Adoinos aigument usually achieves cleaiei contouis when applied to
actual liteiatuie. It may theiefoie be woithwhile to tuin biiey to his discus-
sion of Beckett foi an illustiation of what was deaiest to him in modeinist
piose:
Becketts woiks . . . enjoy what today is the only foimof iespectable fame:
eveiyone shuddeis at them, and yet no-one can peisuade himself that
these eccentiic plays and novels aie not about what eveiyone knows but
no one will admit . . . They deal with a highly conciete histoiical ieality:
the abdication of the subject. Becketts Ecce Hcmc is what human beings
have become. As though with eyes diained of teais, they staie silently out
of his sentences . . . Howevei, the minimal piomise of happiness these
woiks] contain, which iefuses to be tiaded foi comfoit, cannot be had
foi a piice less than total dislocation, to the point of woildlessness.
32
Let us set aside the iathei dubious claim iegaiding a ciitical consensus
on the content of Becketts woiks (what eveiyone knows but no one will
admit), and focus instead on Adoinos disceinment of the coie concein of
Becketts oeuvie: the loss of the tiaditional will-dominated unied subject.
Foi heie Adoinoin good modeinist company, by the wayis asseiting a
I8: : c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm
kind of mimesis, not the iich mimetic iefeientiality of nineteenth-centuiy
social iealism, to be suie, but a iathei denite homology between modeinist
piotagonist and the ieal, extialiteiaiy beings: Becketts Ecce Hcmc is what
human beings have become. Foi Adoino, evidence of what we would today
call a decenteied subject is a tiuth (a highly conciete histoiical ieality)
that manifests itself in modeinist abstiaction, a ieality conveyed almost ex-
clusively at the level of discouise iathei than meie plot. Imbiicated within
this conceptionof modeinismis Adoinos valoiizationof silence (they staie
silently out of his sentences) as well as his embiace of dislocation and
woildlessness as the appiopiiate consequence of iecognizing oneself in
the texts abdicated subject. Latei in this same essay, Adoino ietuins to
the topic of modeinisms eloquent silence: Yet paiadoxically in the same
postWoild Wai II] epoch it is to woiks of ait that has fallen the bui-
den of woidlessly asseiting what is baiied to politics.
33
Woidless heie
is, of couise, Adoinos shoithand foi a lack not of actual woids but an ab-
sence of thematic social engagement. Resistance to empiiical ieality (what-
evei this would mean in piactice) must issue foith fiom this nonconcep-
tual silence. Adoinos modeinist piogiamiesulted in his iathei impiobable
championing of the ieclusive aesthete Stephan Geoige ovei the centuiys
most accomplished committed aitist, Beitolt Biecht.
Canetti, no less than Adoino, is conceined in Autc-da-Fe to iesist the
foices of cultuial aimation, as I have aigued thioughout this study. But
wheieas foi Adoino this consists of avoiding] populaiization and adapta-
tion to the maiket, that is, iemaining at all costs on the piopei side of that
gieat divide, Canetti identies and taigets ceitain veiy specic tiends within
inteiwai cultuiemany of which haunt us stilland meicilessly paiodies
them. This liteiaiy stiategy of seaich and destioy immediately suggests
the fundamental distinction of Canettis modeinist piose: it is, in contiast
to Adoinos veneiation of the nonconceptual object, decidedly concep-
tual, thematic, even aigumentative. In fact, it would seemto enshiine all the
hubiistic evils of instiumental ieason.
While this is suiely somewhat of an exaggeiation, it neveitheless seives
to spotlight the epistemological giid that obtains within the novel and that
opeiates between text and ieadei. Peihaps the cleaiest indicatoi of this
novels epistemic distinctionamong its modeinists cousins is its peculiai wit,
an often wicked humoi that, as I ieiteiate thioughout this study, opeiates
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : I8_
ovei the heads of the benighted guies. This ieadeily soveieignty, howevei,
is peiceivedtoviolate the modeinist contiact: the magisteiial iationalist pei-
spective is held to be an obsolete holdovei fioma disciedited Enlightenment
optimism, the comedic piemise that social failings can be ieliably isolated
and coiiected meiely by identifying them, a kind of embaiiassing naivete.
And nally, the epic puiview undeiwiitten by a imly inteilocking episte-
mic naiiative stiuctuie may appeai to iesuiiect the quaint woild of liteiaiy
iealism that was so widely iepudiated by the modeinists.
Canettis analytic modeinismcannot, howevei, be piopeily appiaised by
ihetoiic that haibois its own foiegone conclusion, such as the supposition
that the piesence of any analytical stiuctuie iepiesents ec ipsc a disieputable
kind of ideological iegiession. Foi this assumption can blind us to the ieal
innovation of Autc-da-Fe, which is to seduce ieadeis into a state of episte-
mological secuiity only latei (with the aiiival of Geoig) to confiont them
with its iadical insuciency. In othei woids, analysis itself seives to cii-
tique tiaditional modes of analysis. The veiy ieadeis who believe themselves
supeiioi to the eiioneous constiuctions of chaiacteis given to ielentlessly
piojecting themselves onto otheis aie stiuctuially diawn into piecisely the
same kind of eiioi, and thus aie fully implicated in the taiget of paiody. In
fact, as we have seen above in chaptei I, Canetti questions the fundamen-
tal piemise of an epistemology based on identication: oui need to aliate
ouiselves with the beautiful (in the case of Autc-da-Fe, this is of couise the
handsome, eiotically chaiged Geoig) is haidly a ieliable basis foi making
judgments about the woild. In falling foi Geoig, as ist-time ieadeis of the
novel typically do (and as a numbei of eaily ciitics of the novel did), we aie
knocked o oui epistemological high hoises.
Yet even the ability to make such condent distinctions between coiiect
and misguided judgments implies an epistemological ciows nest that con-
tiasts staikly with the tentative, iadically contingent peicipient subject of
high modeinisma subject, aftei all, who cannot typically distinguish con-
dently between self and woild, let alone make noimative judgments about
the lattei. This is an impoitant distinction, and one that will allow Canetti
unique latitude, but it should not be exaggeiated. Canettis appiopiiation
of iealisms panoptic naiiative stiuctuies is, ultimately, an analytic pai-
ody of iealisma builesque, so to speak, that haidly iecieates the condent,
giand societal vistas of the gieat iealists Fontane, Zola, oi of his own favoi-
I8 : c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm
ite, Balzac.
34
The ieadei of Autc-da-Fe is soveieign, to be suie, but often ovei
a Lichtenstein of liteiaiy ieality. Like the piotagonist Petei Kien, we know
quite a lot about piecious little.
Oi do we: A closei analysis, undeitaken in gieatei detail above in chap-
tei I, ieveals that even this epistemological secuiity is laigely a chimeia. Not
only does the knowledgeable naiiatoi tuin out to be a sham, little moie than
an oppoitunity foi the chaiacteis to masqueiade theii own bias as objective
tiuth. Moie iadicallyand this has yet to be fully appieciated in the ciiti-
cal liteiatuie on the novelthe facts we possess often iemain nothing moie
than uncontested (oi uncontestable) claims of veiy biased playeis. Howcan
we evei ieally know if Petei Kien is in fact a woild-ienowned sinologist, oi
if his biothei Geoig actually stands a chance of winning the Nobel piize foi
his innovations in the tieatment of psychotic patients: The ex pcst factc dis-
coveiy of ubiquitous self-inteiest and peivasive peispectivism paiading as
omniscience should leave us feeling epistemologically impaiied. What pio-
vides the tempoiaiy illusion of epistemological secuiity, on the othei hand,
is the fact that the naiiative is constiucted of extiemely limited and mutually
exclusive units. Each of the guial woilds iemains utteily distinct, without
the slightest oveilapa fact which thus fai has been taken only as a symbol
of the isolation of the individual in the modein woild. Peihaps Autc-da-Fe
can also be iead to suppoit this existential lament, but this highly aiti-
cial demaication of iival belief woilds ceitainly seives anothei function as
well. Foi it compiises the veiy piecondition of oui vaunted epistemological
piivilege. In this paied-down and schematized univeise, unmasking a chai-
acteis delusions and piojections of self onto otheis is childs play. But is it
oui woild:
Autc-da-Fe oeis itself as a highly stylized model, not as a ieadily in-
habitable simulacium. In pointing to the woild outside itselfto vaiious
cultuial attitudes, beliefs, and piactices of the inteiwai peiiodit simulta-
neously iaises questions about the status and applicability of the veiy analy-
sis it employs. The epistemological stiuctuie that undeiwiites the novels
humoi becomes in the couise of this monumental naiiative also the object of
the inquiiy, a dialectical ienement that has not yet been fully appieciated.
In the end, then, oui epistemological soveieignty is somewhat of a pyiihic
victoiy. Like the infamous buiiow in Kafkas shoit stoiy of the same title,
the naiiative woild of Autc-da-Fe begins to iesemble an enviionment both
teiiibly familiai and yet viitually impossible.
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : I8,
Ceitainly this analytic mode seemed foieign to classical high modein-
ism, which viewed its moie obviously skeptical model of epistemology as
the pioduct of numeious social upheavalsas, in othei woids, the child of
modeinity itself. Biadbuiy and McFailane cite, foi example, Stiindbeigs fa-
mous iemaik on the guies in his Miss }ulie to demonstiate the point: Since
they aie modein chaiacteis, living in an age of tiansition moie uigently hys-
teiical at any iate than the age that pieceded it, I have diawn them as split
and vacillating. They pioceed to geneialize this ielationship to all of mod-
einism: This is much the soit of comment that might have been made by
any Modeinist wiitei between the I88os and the I,_os, and, in its conso-
nance between fiagmentation, discontinuity, and the modein age of tiansi-
tion, it is itself modein.
35
Even Heimann Bioch, who piobably came closest
to Canetti in diagnosing a cultuial ciisisone thinks of the famous essay
Zerfall der Verte (Disintegiation of Values) that ist appeaied within the
ctional context of Die Schlafwandlertook pains to poitiay his chaiac-
teis as psychogiams of a disintegiating communal cultuie. Lukcs noted
this same, consonant ielationship between what he called the eiosion of the
outei woild oi ieality on the one hand and this newconception of pei-
sonality on the othei: Attenuation of ieality and dissolution of peisonality
aie thus inteidependent: the stiongei the one, the stiongei the othei.
36
In contiast to Lukcs, howevei, one nds among the modeinists an
implicit sympathy foi the piotagonists fiagmented consciousness as a con-
sequence oi expiession of modeinity itself. This is not to exclude the pos-
sibility of ciitique oi piotest encoded in such a guie, but one senses
nonetheless, paiticulaily in the postwai ciitical embiace of this fiactuied
consciousness, a consensus on the necessity of this state of aaiisthese
men (it is typically a male piotagonist) have no choice in the mattei, they aie
pioducts and victims of a fiagmented age. Adoinos enthusiasmfoi Beckett,
as we noted, ceitainly contains this same kind of empathetic identication:
eveiyone shuddeis . . . foi this] is what human beings have become. This
shuddei of iecognition ieaches an apogee at that moment when Adoino
ieads himself into the actual position of the piotagonist of Kafkas In der
Strafkclcnie (In the Penal Colony), who, it should be noted, actually loses
consciousness in the piocess of his nightmaiish toituie: Kafka and Beckett
aiouse the feai which existentialism meiely talks about . . . He ovei whom
Kafkas wheels have passedfoi Adoino, a badge of honoihas lost foi
evei both any peace with the woild and any chance of consoling himself with
I8o : c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm
the judgment that the way of the woild is bad.
37
Apait fiom any paiticulai
attitude we may beai towaid these piotagonists, we aie in most cases stiuc-
tuially constiained to iead with them, which is to say that in oidei to make
sense of the naiiative we must assume theii peispective. The consonance
that we aie told obtains between the fiagmentation of modeinity and the
fiagmented modeinist piotagonist ieplicates itself in this way at the level of
text and ieadei.
But ieading with these fellows is not always an easy task. Foi, whethei it
be Musils Tcrle, Rilkes Malte, oi even Doblins Fianz Bibeikopf, we aie
typically confionted with a piotagonist who sueis fiom a ceitain dimin-
ished epistemological piowess, like Tiiesias, they all aie maiked by compio-
mised vision of some soit. One need only iecall, foi example, the establish-
ing scene in Berlin Alexanderplatz, in which Bibeikopf peiceives the walls
of a Beilin tenement couityaid to be falling in on him, though, of couise,
they aie not. Peihaps these subjects have not fully abdicated, yet neithei aie
they the iealist heioes of yesteiyeai. This modein, uid self, which Einst
Mach famously dubbed an ideelle denkckcncmische, keine reelle Einheit
(a thought constiuct, not a ieal unity) is simply less capable of knowing
itself (oi selves), the woild, and of diawing a ciedible line of demaication
between the two. Indeed, this depiivileged modeinist piotagonist becomes
the walking pioof of the obsolete, oi at least aiticial, natuie of these veiy
subject-object distinctions. The typical piotagonist of Expiessionist diama
piesents, as Petei Szondi has shown, a paiallel case in which the social woild
is iefiacted thiough an individuals consciousness and theieby subjected to
notable distoition.
38
The debateif theie was oneas to whethei this see-
ing blindness ieally iepiesents a highei wisdom oi iathei a dangeious sub-
jectivist misiepiesentation becomes lost in the laigei poitiayal of this kind
of handicapped peiception as natuial, even quintessentially modein. Bibei-
kopf may be iight about the menacing quality of the Geiman metiopolis.
But in viewing himself as victim fiom the outset, is he not also peihaps lay-
ing the gioundwoik foi exoneiating himself of all iesponsibility foi his own
actions:
39
These questions, which aie impoitant to Canetti, tend to iecede
in the piesence of these guies, because they aie themselves meiely the ava-
tai of (and sometime antidote to) a laigei-oidei social fiagmentation. As
Biadbuiy and McFailane would have it, modeinism is the ait consequent
on the dis-establishing of communal ieality and conventional noims of cau-
sality . . . The assumption that the age demands a ceitain kind of ait, and that
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : I8,
Modeinism is the ait that it demands, has been feivently held by those who
see in the modein human condition a ciisis of ieality, an apocalypse of cul-
tuial community.
40
In shoit, whethei the modeinist psyche ieveals a iich
inwaidness oi a toituied incoheience, whethei we aie to celebiate oi con-
demn the woild that diove the self both inwaid and apait, this fiagmented
mental state is not a fiee choice, but a givenAdoinos highly conciete
histoiical ieality.
But what if this weie not the whole tiuth: What if the celebiated ciisis of
subjectivity weie, in pait, hype, fad, oi, woise yet, a kind of malleable pei-
sona thiough which one could exploit otheisa feint, in othei woids, that
seived to conceal powei: Fuitheimoie, what if it weie not a question of a
homogenized geneiic self, but a gendeied self, whose eoits at maintaining
self-contiol, so to speak, ievealed iich patteins of cultuial misogyny: All
of this, as I have aigued above in chaptei :, is in fact stiongly suggested by
Autc-da-Fe. To modeinism as it was constiucted at the point of the novels
ieemeigence, and the time of Adoinos ist Ameiican publications on aes-
thetics and politics, such would have been heiesy. Foi this modeinism was,
as we have seen, laigely piedicated upon the sympathetic, oi ccnscnant, de-
piction of the fiagmented self. Autc-da-Fe bieaks modeinisms empathetic
spell ovei the ieadei and questions the political and social implications of
a fiagmented piotagonist by, ist of all, placing the notion of a univeisal,
ungendeied self into seiious doubt.
To notice that Autc-da-Fe iendeis this hallmaik of liteiaiy modeinismin
a maikedly dieient mannei is not to suggest that it necessaiily refutes the
consonant[sympathetic poitiayal of consciousness in, say, Joyces Pcrtrait cf
the Artist as a Ycung Man. Foi this is not a mattei of a simple binaiy, but
iathei of a clustei of possible positions. Yet coming at the end of a tiadition
that had tended to veneiate the modeinist piotagonist, often iendeiing so-
cial ieality only as iefiacted in this guies own fiagmented consciousness,
Canetti was indeed intent on placing the phenomenon in a moie ciitical
light. Specically, Canetti challenges the (often only implicit) consensus that
the modeinist piotagonist is the inexoiable end pioduct of a woild come
unhinged, a victim of vanishing nineteenth-centuiy ceitainties. Autc-da-Fe
challenges Lukcss foimulaif we may speak anachionisticallyby sug-
gesting that the loss of the communal may in pait be attiibutable to the
inwaid tuining not only of modeinist liteiatuie, but of a whole host of
cultuial cuiients in the Weimai eia.
I88 : c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm
The stiong epistemological stiuctuie of the naiiative is of couise haidly
conducive to a sympathetic poitiayal of the ciisis of subjectivity: the ieadei
is positioned outside and above, not with, the chaiacteis undeigoing a ciisis
of subjectivity. The analytic cast of the novel thus asks us to think abcut this
phenomenon, iathei than iead ouiselves into it, a piospect that will yield
insight if only we will allow the novel this libeity. In othei woids, we do not
shuddei in self-iecognition (as Adoino did in the piesence of Beckett and
Kafka), we laugh at what we wish to see as distinct fiom ouiselves. Aftei all,
oveiidentication, misidentication, and self-piojection aie the sins of the
chaiacteis we iecognize because we have as ieadeis (at least until the intio-
duction of Geoig) been held at aims length. The novels analytic fiamewoik
iequiies us to iead Kien, not to iead with Kien, as McFailane would have us
do in good high modeinist fashion. Autc-da-Fe, does not, in othei woids,
fostei the modeinist visicn avec, but iathei a stylized visicn par derriere,
to boiiow a paii of teims used by Hans Bindei in his analysis of Kafka.
41
If,
in the end, we aie depiived of the pleasuies of identication, we aie iichly
compensated with an aesthetic pleasuie that is unchaiacteiistic of the high
modeinist mind-set: humoi.
42
Canettis pioblematization of identication biings into focus the way in
which high modeinismhad distanced itself fiomthis commonplace mannei
of ieading. In a pathbieaking essay on the television miniseiies Holocaust
(I,,8), Andieas Huyssen points to one of modeinisms signal deciencies:
it fails to oei the oppoitunity foi ieadeis to identify. What I am piopos-
ing, Huyssen explains, is that ceitain pioducts of the cultuie industiy and
theii populai success point to shoitcomings in avantgaidist oi expeiimental
modes of iepiesentation.
43
While holding fast to modeinisms tiuth con-
tent, Huyssenfaults these woiks foi failing to meet the socio-psychological
need foi identication with the Jews as victims.
44
What Huyssen identies
in his discussion of Holocaust can indeed be geneialized (as his own book
title suggests) to a much laigei pioblematic: high ait may have something
to leain fiom loweioi moie populistfoims of enteitainment. Long dis-
daining identication as an obsolete if not vulgai ielationship to the text,
modeinism made a viitue out of moie ceiebial modes of ieception, though
it was not, as we have noted, fully conscious of the implications of this piac-
tice. Owing delity vaiiously to Biechtian Veifiemdung (alienation) oi to
Adoinos belief in the poweis of modeinist foim, tiaditional ieadeily identi-
cation with individual chaiacteis was iathei foicefully shunned.
45
But this
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : I8,
should not distiact us fiom the way in which these woiks alieady fullled
an identication function, if only foi a ceitain clientele. Cleaily Adoino saw
himself (oi his self ) ieected in the fiactuied piotagonists of Kafka and
Beckett, even if many othei ieadeis nevei would expeiience this same de-
giee of self-iecognition. Because high modeinism was touted as the only
authentic iesponse to modeinity, and thus implicitly a natuial oi univei-
sal aesthetic, we may have oveilooked the paiticulai identication function
opeiant in these avantgaidist and expeiimental woiks. Autc-da-Fe, on the
othei hand, simply does not peimit this kind of illicit identicatoiy plea-
suie, which elsewheie could of couise take place without ieadeis fully iealiz-
ing that they aie ieading themselves into the iespective modeinist novel. In
Autc-da-Fe the topic and piactice aie simply too piominently foiegiounded
foi this to occui. Identication iemains foi Canetti a pioblem: both within
the ctional woild of the novel and at the level of ieadei and text, identi-
cation emeiges as a vehicle foi appioaching and utteily distoiting ieality.
Theie is no such thing heie as sacied, Tiiesian vision, identication as a hei-
meneutic piinciple is both necessaiy, and necessaiily disguiing. The novel
in fact thiives on the insoluble tension between oui ongoing need to iden-
tify on the one hand, and the inheient fallacy of this gestuie, when iaised
to the level of epistemological ciiteiion, on the othei. Autc-da-Fe both ap-
peases and thwaits this basic ieadeily uige, and in doing so ushes out into
the open a foundational modeinist apoiia.
Canetti cleaily did not diaw the same conclusion foi aesthetics as so
many otheis did. On the contiaiy, he knew (as did Biecht) that analytic
piose holds foith the possibility of a tiuly ciitical stance, including one that
would take aim at the veiy fiamewoik that enables that analysis. Fuithei-
moie, Canetti believed that the subjectivist tuin was something of a hoax,
attiibutable in pait to a cultuie of self-indulgence and solipsism that should
be exposed, if not opposed.
46
Motivated, as we have seen, by a deep con-
cein about the diminution of the public spheie as a consequence of in-
ated notions of subjectivity, Autc-da-Fe suggests the philosophical impos-
sibility of conceiving of a fiagmented self fiom the peispective of an equally
fiagmented consciousness. In Self-Indulgent Philosophies of the Weimai
Peiiod (chaptei _), I develop this thesis in some detail, but the conclusion
may be iestated heie. Any time we imagine an inchoate self, we automati-
callydo so fioma position of a ielatively moie unied psyche: howelse could
we even iecognize this phenomenon, let alone make meaningful compaii-
I,o : c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm
sons with othei notions of subjectivity: Rilke, in othei woids, is not Malte
(oi not cnly Malte)even if on bad days he may have felt just like his psychi-
cally split piotagonistelse he could not have wiitten the novel. Similaily, if
an age of economic and cultuial dislocation had pioduced ieadeis piecisely
and exclusively as fiagmented as Malte, they could nevei iecognize him as
such.
47
Likewise, Adoino, despite his shuddei of self-iecognition in the face
of tiue modeinist ait, is not exclusively to be equated with Kafkas exotically
punished piotagonist. When he is not undei the wheels of Kafkas piose, he
is (oi was) an undeniably self-actuated theoiist, quite capable of deploying
a foimidably analytic self.
Pioblematic as Autc-da-Fe demonstiates it to be, the analytic self can-
not be checked at the dooi when one enteis the iealm of ction. It is always
theie, Canetti seems to be suggesting, so peihaps it is best that we acknowl-
edge it. What Canetti suggests by means of his unmistakably dissonant tieat-
ment of fiagmented subjectivity, theiefoie, is not the inheient invalidity of
the modeinists consonant oi sympathetic iendeiing, but the essential bad
faith in concealing the philosophically necessaiy disciepancy between the
fiagmented modeinist piotagonist and the necessaiily less fiagmented con-
sciousness of authoi and ieadei. As a iesult of this kind of stiong naiiative,
we aie impelled to ask whethei a chaige that has often been laid at the feet of
liteiaiy iealism,
48
namely the concealment of ideology and the implication
of its natuialness, may be just as apposite of high modeinism.
Ceitainly Adoino himself can be faulted, as Fiedeiic Jameson has sug-
gested, foi failing to iecognize the iiieducible iole of the tianscendental
subject in his own Ciitical Theoiy.
49
Given Adoinos noted emphasis on
oui unfieedom in the face of the administeied univeise, theie seems to
be in fact little iole foi the analytic self in political society. Fieedom, agency,
and the old Caitesian self that undeilies both aie simply comfoiting illu-
sions, Adoino maintains. One could in fact aigue that Adoino simply dis-
placed ieective agency fiomindividuals to modeinist autonomous ait. The
Kantian autonomy of the individual becomes, with the iequisite mateiial-
ist alteiations, the dening and iedemptive chaiacteiistic of ait.
50
Ceitainly
Adoino is moie sanguine about the piospects of modein ait than he is about
the individuals capacity to change society.
51
At the only point in the essay
when he expiesses explicit concein foi social justice, Adoino links its attain-
ment to modeinist foim iathei than to tiaditional political activism.
52
The
Mind of Modeinism, to use McFailanes teiminology, seems foi Adoino
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : I,I
to have mysteiiously wandeied into the modeinist ait object itself. Mindful
that this ciitical subjectivity does not simply vanish into thin aii, Autc-da-
Fe poses the question about this minds wheieabouts, so to speak, once it
has abdicated.
53
One need not have been a leftist, politically astute Jewish intellectual in
the nal Weimai yeaisthough the young Canetti was of couise all of these
thingsto notice that these veiy same modein times had pioduced a whole
aiiay of othei selves that had little in common with the modeinist piedilec-
tion foi genuine fiagmentation and dissolution. This is the context within
which we must judge Geoigs fascination with the goiilla man, a laughable
guie meant to lampoon that ostensibly antibouigeois movement known as
vitalismand loosely tied to Nietzsche. As I elaboiate inchaptei _, Geoigs en-
thusiastic conveision to this kind of piimitivismhaibois deeply ieactionaiy
and authoiitaiian tendencies. Fiist, this appaiently emancipatoiy peisona is
at ioot antisocial: his sense of ieality consists of a highly piotean bubble of
consciousness that follows him aiound like an invalids oxygen tent. Undei-
lying this putatively libeiating mode of consciousness is, as we have seen,
the iadical suboidination of ontology not to epistemology pei se, but to this
single peicipient individuals whim.
Geoigs appiopiiation of this mind-set is, howevei, the most memoiable
ciitique in this context. He sits at the knees of the goiilla man in oidei to
leain how to acquiie not only his unique languagewhich is ultimately no
language at allbut piecisely his mode of consciousness, the iadical mal-
leability of which is thought by its veiy natuie to contest the iigidities of
bouigeois society. Geoigs caieei, howevei, tells a dieient stoiy. Undei-
neath the facade of a vulneiable, peimeable consciousness luiks a self eveiy
bit as haid-nosed and self-seiving as his biothei Petei. Geoig piesents the
image of an intellectuals insidious ietieat fioman eveimoie daunting social
ieality undei the covei of a pseudopolitical and specious antibouigeois ide-
ology. Thiity yeais aftei Canetti wiote Autc-da-Fe, Lukcs biought a similai,
devastating chaige against those enamoied of the dissolution of peison-
ality, which he attiibuted to a desiie to dissociate oneself fiom political ie-
sponsibility. Lukcs teimed this investment in fiagmented subjectivity the
doctiine of the eteinal incognito because it piovided an alibi to those men
such as Maitin Heideggei, Einst Jungei, Cail Schmitt, and Gottfiied Benn
who paiticipated in Nazismand latei wished to believe that at a deepei level
of selfhood they had in fact iemained opponents. It was piecisely the fiag-
I,: : c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm
mented conception of the self to which they appealed in theii self-defense.
54
Canetti could not of couise have imagined the piecise usefulness of Geoigs
infatuation to Nazi authoiities, but the potential dangeis aie alieady cleaily
piesent in the novel.
This is a distinctive contiibution. Moie than any othei novel fiom within
the movement, Autc-da-Fe contests the unlimited gloiication of fiag-
mented subjectivity, paiticulaily when it becomes the aibitei of social ieal-
ity. By means of a negative dialectic, the novel suggests that theie is a limit,
oi endpoint, beyond which the veneiation of individual consciousnessoi,
moie accuiately, an individuals consciousnesscannot pioceed. It is not a
simple mattei of upholding some positive notion of the social that must, at
all costs, be defended against the onslaughts of iampant subjectivity. Rathei,
Autc-da-Fe seems conceined to iemind us that modeinity has not eiadi-
cated the pioblem of poweiand ceitainly not by means of ietieat into
a guies iich psyche. Moie piecisely, the novel suggests that powei luiks
in the veiy denition and deployment of fiagmented consciousness. Aftei
ieading Autc-da-Fe, one can nevei again take unieective comfoit in the in-
waid tuining of the novel, foi we must always now ask ouiselves whethei
the highly nuanced, layeied consciousness we encountei may ultimately dis-
guise authoiitaiian desiies, oi, by viitue of its manifest vulneiability, invite
those of otheis. Otto Weiningei sensed the widening gap between the tia-
ditional, will-dominated, ethical self and the modein, fiagmented, em-
piiical self. He wondeied how such weakened empiiical specimens (which
he notoiiously saw exemplied in women and Jews) could possibly suivive
with any dignity and meaning in the modein, mateiialistic woild. Though
infamous today foi his misogyny and anti-Semitism, Weiningei may deseive
to be iemembeied also, as StevenBellei aigues, foi aiticulating the civic ciisis
posed by the iise of the empiiical self. Ceitainly Canetti acknowledged the
huge inuence Weiningei had on himand his entiie geneiation. That impact
is cleaily felt in the novel, which asks, as we have seen, howthis veiy modein
self compoits with notions of communal cultuie and civic iesponsibility. In
the end, Autc-da-Fe foices us to bid faiewell to the high modeinist natuial-
ization of the impaiied self as the unexamined avatai of the modein age.
Moie the novel does not do. Both the use of iadically ieduced chaiacteis
(with the paitial exception of Geoig) and the deployment of chaiacteis who
constiuct aiticially distinct and mutually exclusive woilds-units, instead
of the iadically moie complex and oveilapping poitiayal of consciousness
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : I,_
typical of Joyce oi Woolf, suggest iathei cleaily that Canettis ciitique is not
meant diiectly to contest the iich and sophisticated minds we encountei in
the ction of the gieat masteis of modeinism, many of whom, as we know
fiom his autobiogiaphy, he seems to have iespected deeply. As we saw in
chaptei ,, Canetti explicitly ienounced psychological iealism ovei the pio-
tests of Bioch, and one cannot help feeling that Canetti sensed the dangei
of undeimining social ciitique by pioviding compellingly nuanced guies
whose psychological appeal might seive to explain a set of piactices we
aie meant to place in question.
55
Autc-da-Fe is, at any iate, simply incom-
mensuiate with such novels. Yet it may well seive as a necessaiy coiiective, a
function that is, as I hope is cleai by now, diiectly asciibable to the authois
choice of an epistemologically stiong naiiative stiuctuie.
Befoie concluding this topic altogethei, it may be helpful to obseive
that oui inteiest in the epistemological ciiteiion of liteiaiy modeinism has
its own histoiy. To be suie, the phenomenon of fiagmented subjectivity is
ieadily obseivable in the contempoiaiy texts, both ctional and ciitical. In-
deed, the Austiian ciitic Heimann Bahi used the teim Nervenkunst (neu-
ialgic ait) to piomote the tiend that Anglo-Ameiican ieadeis know, thanks
to Heniy James, as the inwaid tuining of the novel. Bahi advocated the
application of the Natuialist technique, which in the woik of Ibsen, Stiind-
beig, and Hauptmann had so impiessively captuied social conditions, to the
inteiioi life of the mind. While this inwaid tuin necessaiily tended to val-
oiize subjectivity, one does not notice among contempoiaiy modeinists the
same degiee of skepticism that latei ciitics would biing to the discussion of
modeinism. Indeed, if one looks to the modeinist piactitioneis themselves,
one notes not a iadical doubt, but a suipiising condence in theii eoit to
poitiay the modein woild. Dieient tools, foci, methods, conventionsall
of these would, of couise, be iequiied. But the modeinists weie less despaii-
ing of theii ability to pioduce a compelling liteiaiy peispective on modei-
nity than committed to bieaking with obsolete iealist liteiaiy conventions.
While any kind of summaiy statement iuns the iisk of oveisimplication,
it may be faii to say that the modeinists themselvesas we saw in Eliot,
aboveviewed fiagmented subjectivity as paiadoxically enabling, not nec-
essaiily ciippling. Ceitainly the New Ciitical love of paiadox would sustain
this potential to see loss as gain.
The investment in a iadically decenteied self became entienched, it
seems, with the ascent not onlyof Deiiida and his disciples, but also of Lacan
I, : c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm
and Foucault on the ciitical hoiizon duiing the I,,os and I,8os. Theii al-
most exclusive focus on liteiaiy modeinismand one could easily expand
this list to include, foi example, Kiistevas inteiest in modeinist poetiy as the
piivileged locus of the semiotic and Baithess exaltation of the modeinist
wiiteily textcan in pait be explained by the fact that such woiks oeied
piooftexts foi a clustei of theoiies that similaily conceived of the self as
essentially depiivileged,
56
that is, as an oveideteimined site complexly con-
stiucted by impeisonal foices iathei than an autonomous, self-legislating
subject. Modeinisms vaunted epistemological shift (Stevenson) thus ie-
ceived a poweiful boost by the canonization of these critical paiadigms, such
that the ietiospective constiuction of modeinismbecame signicantly moie
skeptical about the modeinist piotagonists epistemological piowess than
the oiiginal authois themselves may have been. Appioaching Autc-da-Fe
thiough the piism of such theoiies of couise made it even less likely that
the novel would be admitted to the piopeily modeinist (iead: epistemo-
logically skeptical) canon. In the case of Autc-da-Fe, this point may explain
the cuiious fact that eaily ievieweis of the thiities and foities cleaily and
iepeatedly iecognized the novel as modein, expeiimental, and anti-iealist.
Yet latei ciitics of the seventies and eighties, inuenced peihaps unwittingly
by the centiality of subjectivity and epistemology in liteiaiy theoiy, weie
moie ambivalent: Daiby, whose study situates the novel within disinte-
giative anti-iealist naiiative stiategies chaiacteiistic of modeinism, is ulti-
mately bewildeied by the piesence of a im naiiative stiuctuie. He deliveis
his veidictwhich convicts the novel of haiboiing piecisely the epistemo-
logically stiong naiiative fiamewoik identied aboveas if it had befallen
him to unmask a beloved impostei. Likewise, Dietei Lieweischeidt, opei-
ating on the piemise that only consonant modeinism is valid modeinism,
acts as if he has discoveied a ciyptoiealist novel masqueiading as modeinist,
emblazoning his gieat discoveiy in the title of his aiticle: A Contiadiction
in the Conceptualization of the Novel.
Lukcs and the Loss of the Social
In diamatizing fiagmented consciousness not as the modein condition
pei se, but as something contingent and paitial, Canetti appioaches the
substance of one of Geoig Lukcss fundamental ciiticisms of modeinism,
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : I,,
namely that it univeisalizes and tianscendentalizes subjective human ex-
peiience. Wiiting of the modeinist tieatment of time, Lukcs obseives: The
unciitical appioach of modeinist wiiteisand of some modein philoso-
pheisieveals itself in theii conviction that this subjective expeiience con-
stitutes ieality as such. That is why this tieatment of time can be used by
the iealistic wiitei to chaiacteiize ceitain guies in his novels, although in
a modeinist woik it may be used to desciibe ieality itself . . . We aiiive,
theiefoie, at an impoitant distinction: the modeinist wiitei identies what
is necessaiily a subjective expeiience with ieality as such, thus giving a dis-
toited pictuie of ieality as a whole (Viiginia Woolf is an extieme example
of this). The iealist, with his ciitical detachment, places what is a signi-
cant, specically modein expeiience in a widei context, giving it only the
emphasis it deseives as a pait of a gieatei, objective whole.
57
If Geoigs goiilla-feivoi iepiesents a paiticulai instance of ieactionaiy
modeinismas I have pioposediathei than some quintessential expies-
sion of the modein age, then Canettis ciitique does come veiy close to
Lukcss piotest against the unciitical exaltation of subjectivity ovei the
inteisubjective social whole. But as the passage above demonstiates, this
similaiity is itself only paitial: foi Lukcss touchstone of ciitical iealism
is, as he notes iepeatedly, the liteiaiy iepiesentation of that widei context,
a gieatei, objective whole. And piecisely this is missing fiom Autc-da-Fe.
Though Canettis novel lacks this sine qua ncn of Lukcsian ciitical ieal-
ism, a common spiiit of ciitique neveitheless inhabits the woik of both.
Lukcs nevei tiied of deciying, most memoiably peihaps in his signatuie
essay The Ideology of Modeinism, the negation of outwaid ieality, the
iejection of naiiative objectivity, and the attenuation of actuality, all
lamentable chaiacteiistics he located in the woik of the iecognized mod-
einists Joyce, Musil, Gide, and, of couise, Kafka. Again and again, Lukcs
wained about mistaking a histoiical symptom(such as the individuals iadi-
cal isolation) foi a natuial and theiefoie unalteiable aspect of ieality. In
singling out Heideggeis concept of thiownness-into-being (Gewcrfenheit
ins Dasein), Lukcs fuitheimoie opposes what he sees as the iuse of em-
ploying the dignity of philosophy in oidei to undeiwiite an essentially
asocial woildview. This implies, Lukcs aigues, that man is ccnstituticn-
ally unable to establish ielationships with things oi peisons outside him-
self.
58
McFailanes ihapsodic endoisement of Kiens philosophy of blind-
ness would seem to be a case in point.
I,o : c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm
Autc-da-Fe is thus solidly in line with this kind of ciitique, though of
couise it is not Heideggei, but philosophies populai duiing the Weimai
peiiod such as neoempiiicism and neo-Kantianism, that foim the piincipal
taiget of the novels paiody of philosophy, as I have elaboiated in chaptei _.
Still, peihaps we need to ask how the novel can shaie the Lukcsian con-
cein foi the diminution, oi outiight abandonment, of the social without
pioviding that putatively necessaiy coiiective of naiiative objectivity. The
answei deiives fiom the dissonant naiiation desciibed above. Rathei than
emanating fiom laigely sympathetic consciousnesssympathetic in teims
of epistemological stance iathei than paiticulai contentthe text of Autc-
da-Fe deiives fiom guies fiom whom ieadeis immediately feel distanced.
In shoit, we witness and deploie the ieduction of the social as a highly sus-
pect function of theii subjectivity, we watch as chaiacteis alteinately illu-
minate and daiken the social woild accoiding to a chaiacteiistic obsession,
andgiven the highly stylized epistemological piivilege we enjoywe iec-
ognize and condemn theii mistakes. Thus, in contiast to Lukcss iequisite
widei context, the ciitical stance of Autc-da-Fe pioceeds fiom the viitual
absenceoi at least the suspiciously ephemeial and malleable qualityof
the social oidei.
At this point one might object that wiinging ciitique fiom deaith of de-
piction is a veiy convenient inteipietive gambit, and, fuitheimoie, one that
could just as easily apply to that body of consonant modeinism that I have
thus fai sought to keep at some distance fiom Autc-da-Fe. The key dif-
feience, howevei, is that Canettis novel foiegiounds the guial piocess of
ieducing, iefunctioning, and excluding the social. Just as Lukcs aiiaigns
Heideggei foi lending a dubious iespectability to modeinism, the novel ap-
piehends Kien in the veiy act of devising a cuiiously self-seiving philosophy
to authoiize his exclusion of the laigei woild. I have alieady made biief ief-
eience to Geoigs similaily suspect appiopiiation of the then-populai philo-
sophical movement known as neoempiiicism, which, despite supeicial dif-
feiences, he deploys to similaily solipsistic ends. But this is just one side of
peiception, in oidei to make the point, Canetti shows in some of the fun-
niest passages of the novel how objects of peiceptionieal places and cul-
tuial objects known to the ieadei independently of the textaie giadually
denied, occluded, oi iemade in the image of the mad peiceivei.
The laigest of these cultuial dcnnees is Vienna itself, which is both eeiily
piesent and absent in Autc-da-Fe. In fact, it is its occasional piesence and
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : I,,
unexpected ieappeaiance that makes us feel the peivasive absence moie
acutely. Regaiding the modeinists use of municipal settings, Lukcs main-
tains that Joyce uses Dublin, Kafka and Musil the Hapsbuig Monaichy, as
the locus of theii masteipieces. But the locus they lovingly depict is little
moie thana backcloth: it is not basic totheii aitistic intention.
59
TheVienna
of Autc-da-Fe is no meie backdiop in this sense. The evocation of the Aus-
tiian capital, paiticulaily of two gieat institutions of the old dual monaichy,
seives not to host but to contest the subjectivist pioclivities of the guies.
That aichitectuial and cultuial anchoi of old Vienna, the Cathedial of St.
Stephen, fails to giound oi even oiient the subjectivist fantasies of Petei
Kien, who pauses at the landmaik statue of Chiist (the famous Toothache
Chiist) only to see himself in this sculptuie. Theiese indulges similai sub-
jectivist inclinations duiing hei visit to the Cathedial: in the gilded painting
of the Last Suppei displayed ovei one of the side altais she is only able to see
a ieection of hei own small and venal woild. This is cleaily not the see-
ing blindness that McFailane claimed foi the novel, this is iank distoition.
The glimpses we get of Vienna, though admittedly fewand fai between, pio-
vide us that which the guies utteily lack: a point of iefeience by which to
gauge the paitisan piojections of the self-absoibed guies. The novels much
moie extended focus on the Theiesianum, a thinly veiled iefeience to the
ieal-woild Viennese state-iun auction house cum pawn shop known as the
Doiotheum, diaws oui attentionnot only tothe paiticulai economic ciises
of the Weimai yeais, but also to the way in which tiaditional cultuie was
then suboidinated in as yet unpiecedented ways to the demands of naked
commeice. The book-eating ogie whom Fischeile conjuies in oidei to mo-
tivate Kien to iansom books is ieally just the humoious liteialization of the
Doiotheums standaid piactice of commodifying and consuming ait of all
kinds. Though the novels staging of this inteiwai ciisis of values happens to
oveilap in pait with Kiens own anxieties about disappeaiing cultuial cei-
tainties, the evocation of the Theiesianum fails to fully iatify the piotago-
nists nostalgia. In fact, both aspects of Vienna depicted in the novelboth
the cathedial and the cathedial of commeiceseive to dene iathei than
iesolve widespiead cultuial anxieties chaiacteiistic of, but not limited to,
the Austiian Fiist Republic. Though this evocation of Vienna would seem
too scant to fulll Lukcss piesciiption foi social ciitique,
60
we neveithe-
less gainei piecisely this ciitical vantage point fiom this modest municipal
depiction.
I,8 : c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm
Lukcs memoiably accused modeinism not only of neglecting the widei
social context, but also of the iejection of histoiy, citing Gottfiied Benns
Static Pcems as an exemplaiy iealization of the subjectivist tendency that
Henii Beigson is said to have sanctioned philosophically.
61
This concein foi
a lack of authentic histoiical consciousness iesonates also within Autc-da-
Fe, but with this caveat: wheieas Lukcs is conceined with the outiight de-
nial of histoiy, Canetti is moie conceined with its peiveision as a device
foi avoiding the anxieties of modeinity.
62
As we noted eailiei, this kind of
spuiious histoiicism makes its appeaiance in the novel not in the foim
of modein ait (as Lukcs held), but in the Weimai-eia pulp ction that has
somehow found a place in Kiens august piivate libiaiy and is passed on to
Theiese as the faie appiopiiate to the baiely liteiate. Canetti employs the
then-wildly populai novel by Willibald Alexis, The Trcusers cf Mr. Bredcw,
which as we noted was published in school editions foi couises on Geiman
histoiy duiing the inteiwai peiiod, to suggest the suspiciously histoiical ap-
peal of this liteiatuie. Despite the histoiical veneei, this is sheei escapism,
as we sawabove in chaptei I, and is theiefoie iightly juxtaposed with Geoig
Kiens addiction to eiotic Fiench novels.
63
As in the mattei of the iequisite
widei social context, the ciitique heie pioceeds by way of negationoi,
moie piecisely, by double negation: the novel iejects the chaiacteis own
dubious iejection of histoiy.
The iole of myth in Autc-da-Fe should be at least biiey mentioned in
this context, foi it is the integiating powei of myth in high modeinism that
is typically opposed to the centiifugal foice of histoiy. Modeinisms alleged
denial of histoiy, to which Lukcs diaws oui attention, often went hand in
hand with an embiace of myth. The classic expiession of this doctiine is
found in Eliot, who famously peiceived in Joyces Ulysses a ceitain mytho-
logical method ciedited as an eective means of contiolling, of oideiing,
of giving a shape and a signicance to the immense panoiama of futility and
anaichy which is contempoiaiy histoiy.
64
This stabilizing oi ieconciling
function, even if only as an aesthetic eect, has no counteipait in Autc-da-
Fe. Though myth (dieiently conceived) would latei assume gieat impoi-
tance foi Canetti in a positive sense, in the novel it seives piimaiily as giist
foi a stinging indictment of the oiientalist constiuction of misogynistic
high cultuie. Suiely Kiens misogynist tcur de fcrce neai the end of the novel,
which diaws so iichly upon the mythological ieseives of Westein cultuie,
ieveals a cultuial canon in ciisis. The novels unielenting analytical modein-
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : I,,
ismcieates in the end a mass of deeply distuibing negations without piomise
of iesolution. Canetti himself claims to have been left piofoundly unneived
by the cultuial wieckage Autc-da-Fe left in its wake.
65
Things nally do not
fall togethei, they fall apait. The novel concludes in a state that is a fai call
fiom McFailanes notion of supeiintegiation.
Undeilying Lukcss entiie ciitique of modeinism is the assumption that
we aie insidiously positioned to side with the piotagonist. Depiived of any
independent peispective we would deiive fioma piopei sociohistoiical con-
text, we aie sucked into his subjective iealitysuboidinated, as it weie,
to his unifying vision. Even if we dont paiticulaily like the modeinist
heio, we iun the iisk, Lukcs wains, of mistaking his paiticulai fate as uni-
veisal, ineluctable, and theiefoie unalteiable. Lukcs, in othei woids, con-
cuis not only that high modeinism is tantamount to what we have above
teimed consonant modeinism, but aigues that veiy point fiom additional
angles.
66
Yet then, as now, Autc-da-Fes maikedly dissonant postuie com-
plicates this dichotomy, foi while it cleaily does not qualify as an exemplai
of Lukcsian ciitical iealism, neithei does it exhibit the ideological dangeis
against whichLukcs so tiielessly inveighed. As we have hadnumeious occa-
sions to obseive thus fai, the guies in the novel aie schematically diawn,
not psychologically nuanced appioximations of ieal people, a point Canetti
latei undeiscoied, though it is of couise easily enough obseived in the novel
itself. These guies, haidly the subjectivist siiens of Lukcss antimodein-
ist imagination, aie instead quite consciously stylized vehicles foi a whole
aiiay of social and cultuial piactices employed in doomedand peihaps
theiefoie humoiousways to cope with the expeiience of modeinity. When
the novels ieclusive piotagonist seeks to wall himself o fiom a thieatening
tide of humanity, ensconcing himself as the mastei ieseaichei in a caiica-
tuie of positivist inquiiy, we see him as the expiession of paiticulai social
and intellectual anxietiesnot, as Lukcs feaied, as the timeless epitome of
the human condition. Theiefoie it is piecisely withcut diiectly depicting the
common life, the stiife and togetheiness of othei human beings, that we
come to see the solitaiiness of Kien and company as a specic social fate,
not a univeisal ccnditicn humaine.
67
The fact that Canettis novel shaies so much of the spiiit of Lukcss clas-
sic ciitique of modeinism cannot, accoiding to the pievailing ideas of the
time, have encouiaged postwai ieadeis to considei Autc-da-Fe as authenti-
cally modeinist. Given the fact that it ultimately conims neithei Adoinos
:oo : c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm
positive noi Lukcss negative constiuction of liteiaiy modeinism, the novel
was viitually destined foi emaigination as long as these and similai views
held sway. Yet as helpful as this context can be in situating Autc-da-Fe within
what may be a moie familiai liteiaiy-histoiical landscape, it may piove ie-
fieshing to note in conclusion the aiticiality of this gambit. Not once in all
of his wiitings does Canetti iefei to modeinism in the sense that we have
been using it in this chaptei. Canetti undoubtedly counted himself among
those modein aitists, who, as Ezia Pound put it, sought to make it new,
but he was just as likely to aliate himself with modein music and sculptuie
as with liteiatuie. He ielates feeling quite at home as a guest at Heimann
Scheichens symposium on modein music in Stiassbouig in I,__, because
I had wiitten Kant Catches Fiie the manusciipt title of Autc-da-Fe] and
Wedding and was conscious of the fact that with that I, like the composeis
in attendance, had done something new.
68
Indeed, Canetti contemplated
wiiting the libietto foi one of Scheichens modeinist compositions. In ie-
counting Fiitz Wotiubas appioving ieaction to the guies of Autc-da-Fe,
Canetti fuitheimoie invites a compaiison between his own liteiaiy guies
and the haid, uncompiomising guies fashioned by this modeinist sculp-
toi.
69
Canetti felt an intense aitistic biotheihood (his teim) withWotiuba,
about whom he latei wiote a monogiaph, and saw his own liteiaiy accom-
plishment ieected in the musical innovations of his fiiend, Alban Beig. In
othei woids, when Canetti conceived of modeinism, his puiviewwas haidly
limited to liteiatuie alone.
This is not to suggest that Canetti was unfamiliai with the peculiaily lit-
eiaiy avant gaide of the I,_os. On the contiaiy, he iepoits: Duiing the
last foui oi ve yeais of independent Austiia . . . one could heai a tiinity
of names, which was held high by the avant gaide: Musil, Joyce and Bioch,
oi Joyce, Musil and Bioch.
70
All of whom, of couise, weie known to him
well beyond meie heaisay. Joyce attended one of Canettis salon ieadings
(though he left at inteimission because he was appaiently put o by the
Viennese dialect), while both Musil and Bioch weie Canettis close fiiends.
Neveitheless, Canetti dwelt less on what these (and othei) modeinists had
in common with iegaid to technique, theme, oi ideology, than with theii
shaied goal of ventuiing something newand aesthetically challenging. In the
end, this was Canettis litmus test foi iespectable modein ait: does it pandei
to conventional taste, and meiely titillate, oi does it iisk making it dicult,
theieby iesisting the alluie of commeicial success: The odd tiinity (die
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : :oI
abscnderliche Trinitat) of modeinists mentioned above was bound togethei,
at least foi Canetti, not by some explicit aesthetic piogiam oi ideological
doctiine, but meiely by theii desiie to negate the liteiaiy status quo. They
belongedthis I nevei doubtedto a veiy small gioup of people who with
liteiatuie made it dicult foi themselves, who did not wiite foi populaiity
oi vulgai success. At that time this may have been moie impoitant foi me
than theii woik.
71
Authois like Stefan Zweig and Fianz Weifel, on the othei
hand, weie ielegated to the categoiy of the mundane liteiatuie of those
yeais piecisely foi tiimming theii liteiaiy sails to maiket success. Canetti
applied the same standaid to modein music, as when he excoiiated the
Viennese publics obduiacy in iejecting the expeiimental compositions of
Alban Beig and Anton Webein.
72
Canettis bioad, multimedia conception of modeinism, which inciden-
tally shaies Adoinos own iigoious opposition to aesthetic commodica-
tion, piovides a helpful ieoiientation, I think, as we conclude this discussion.
Unbeholden to any of the high piiests of modeinism, Canetti continued to
tiead his own, soveieign path. At a time when modeinism was in its heyday,
Canetti penned an essay tellingly titled Realismus und Neue Virklichkeit
(Realism and New Reality), a piece that appeais intent on sciambling the
conventional wisdom. Indeed, in one of the veiy few places wheie he tiains
his attention explicitly on modein liteiatuie, Canetti pointedly eschews the
language of liteiaiy modeinism, advocating instead a biand of new ieal-
ism that must iise to the challenge of oui daunting new ieality. While it
is undoubtedly instiuctive to contiast his novel, paiticulaily its distinctive
analytic stiuctuie, with bettei known high modeinist schemas, we might
nally peimit Autc-da-Fe its own fiee beith. In these nal pages, then, let
us peimit Canettis own achievementiathei than the aesthetic ciiteiia of
otheisto fiame a concluding discussionof the authois subsequent oeuvie.
The End of Modeinism and a New Beginning
The Nazi book buining and ban on degeneiate ait could not have come
at a woise time foi Canetti. Yet while these developments suiely thwaited the
ieception of Autc-da-Fe in the Geiman-speaking woild, they do not fully
explain the novels maiginal ielationship to the high modeinist canon in the
postwai yeais. Aftei all, Autc-da-Fe had been published in both Biitain and
:o: : c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm
the United States to ciitical acclaim and had even gaineied a majoi liteiaiy
awaid in Fiance befoie the end of the I,os. Though nevei as widely iead as,
say, Thomas Manns Der Zauberberg (The Magic Mountain), it was ceitainly
known to the cultuial elite. We aie foiced theiefoie to face the conclusion
that Autc-da-Fes status as a liteiaiy Sondeiling (Auei) has less to do with
woild histoiy, accident, oi neglect than with the fact that it was eectively,
thoughpeihaps not consciously, excludedfiomthe highmodeinist canon
and, of couise, with the fact that it is indeed a veiy dieient kind of book.
As we have seen, these dieiences go well beyond the meie suiface va-
gaiies of mood, atmospheie, and style. It has been the fiankly anachionis-
tic task of this nal chaptei to tiansplant ouiselves into the peiiod when
high modeinismieigned supieme in oidei to woik out consciously the ways
in which Autc-da-Fe found itself at loggeiheads with cential, though not
always explicit, tenets of this movement. Canetti was a modeinist who loved
Kafka and Musil, but also Balzac and Heiniich Mann (moie than Thomas,
by the way). If we chafe at McFailanes belated and awkwaid attempt to biing
Canetti into the modeinist fold, we do so because of a piofound sense of
misalignment: Kien is simply no Tiiesias. Indeed, whethei we look to the
standaids of a tiaditionalist such as Eliot oi to those of the Westein Maixist
Adoino, we see that Autc-da-Fe iemains, at a fundamental level, delightfully
dieient. The iecent eoits to iewiite modeinism as a bioad set of cultuial
iesponses to the economic iuptuies of modeinity thieaten to obscuie the
fact that the old elitist canon of gieat modeinist masteis was indeed held
togethei by an identiable and sometimes pioblematic coie of qualities that
happen to enshiine much of what Autc-da-Fe avidly contests. Theie weie,
in othei woids, good (oi at least substantive) ieasons foi keeping Canettis
novel at aims length. The inclusive, demociatizing gestuie of the new mod-
einist paiadigm should not, whatevei othei salubiious iesults it may have
biought about, be used to conceal impoitant conceptual dieiences.
73
As
beneciaiies of this modeinist peiestioika, foi example, we can now think
of both Rilke and Canetti as suitably modeinist, but we would only conate
these iathei dieient novels at oui own peiil. Though today we might be
inclined to iead Rilkes Malte as a comment on the anomie of the modein
metiopolis, as ciitics have iecently uiged, what we most assuiedly cannot
do is iead Autc-da-Fe as the celebiation of the isolated, piecious aesthete. In
clashing with essential ciiteiia of high modeinism, Canetti eained his place
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : :o_
on the sidelines. As a kind of iebel-paiticipant, Autc-da-Fe self-consciously
set a limit to the modeinism of its day.
Yet this discussion, helpful as it may be in dening distinguishing fea-
tuies both of Canettis piose and of high modeinisms assumptions, thieat-
ens to become somewhat antiquaiian. Suiely it is an act of academic fancy to
imagine Autc-da-Fe sitting in judgment on its modeinist contempoiaiies
a kind of intellectual ievenge fantasy, peihaps. This would be as misguided
as it is fiuitless. Though Autc-da-Fe can be said to aiticulate and foieshadow
the veiy aiguments that would latei biing down the canon of the isolated
gieat masteis, this says nothing of the ongoing ielevance of that chaiactei-
istic featuie of Canettis piose that we have consideied in some depth heie,
namely its maikedly analytic quality.
Ceitainly this is a featuie that chaiacteiizes all his latei woik. Canetti un-
abashedly employed ction as well as nonction to investigate a woild he
felt to be both incieasingly menacing and yet unfailingly awe-inspiiing. His
thiee allegedly absuidist plays (Vedding, Ccmedy cf Vanities, and The Num-
bered) contain geneious quantities of hypeibole and the giotesque, yet ie-
tain at bottom a iecognizable social-ciitical agendaand weie foi this veiy
ieason held by some ciitics to be insuciently absuid.
74
The thiee-volume
autobiogiaphy, the most successful of all Canettis wiitings, was published
to ciitical and populai acclaim. Yet, heie too, ciitics lamented the fact that
the naiiatoi failed to engage in sucient quantities of epistemological self-
agellation. He should have indulged in iitualistic expiessions of his in-
ability to naiiate, they opine, oi, at least, he might have foiegiounded the
incommensuiability of the naiiating and naiiated selves. But heie, as in the
novel, Canetti thwaited ieadeis expectations.
75
Canettis captivating memoii of his visit to Noith Afiica, Die Stimmen
vcn Marrakesch (The Voices of Maiiakesh, I,o8) illustiates the paiadox of
this analytic piose paiticulaily well. Canetti impaits a seiies of memoiable
apeius into the lives of Aiabs and Jews (his visit in the spiing of I,, pie-
ceded the Algeiian Civil Wai of I,,o:) without ienouncing his status as an
outside obseivei. Ignoiant of the native languagesbut not of the colonial
FienchCanetti folds this linguistic handicap into the stoiies he tells, it be-
comes the self-conscious piecondition of the expeiiences he ielates and the
pictuies he paints. This fiank acknowledgment of his own limited subject
position stands not in the tiadition of that high modeinist, quasi-mystical
:o : c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm
Tiiesian seeing-blindness, but instead demonstiates in an exemplaiy and
timely mannei the necessaiily dual thiust of any multicultuial undeitaking:
the iiiepiessible quest to knowthe othei combined with the humility incum-
bent upon any foieign obseivei. These two factois, piesent also in Autc-da-
Fe, pioduce iemaikable glimpses into the lives of the native peoples. Theii
voices aie iecoided in the eais of the Euiopean intellectual, but aie nevei
fully tianslated. Canettis veiy title, TheVcices cf Marrakesh, diaws oui atten-
tion to that which the authoi can nevei fully compiehend. Though iealized
in fascinatingly dieient ways, Canettis analytic piose always contains the
two elements we have obseived thioughout this studyof Autc-da-Fe. a piob-
ing gestuie towaid discoveiy and an attendant ieection on the diculty
(and sometime futility) of that veiy undeitaking.
With the conclusion of Autc-da-Fe Canetti himself was at a dead end. The
social spheie he saw thieatened by subjectivist fads and philosophies was
something iepiesentable only indiiectly in ction and by means of negation
because it existed foi the authoi piincipally as uniealized potential. Canetti
spent the next thiity-plus yeais puisuing a positive foundation that would
justify his hope foi the futuie of the human community in the face of the
demonstiated baibaiism of the two woild wais. It was not something the
young novelist factually knew, but something he feivently sought. Except foi
those few plays, the best of which, Hcchzeit (Wedding, I,_:), was contem-
poianeous with the novel and shaied its fundamental ciitique of a iadically
diminished social spheie, Autc-da-Fe iepiesents viitually the beginning and
end of Canettis ctional output.
Canettis second lifes woik, Crcwds and Pcwer, can appiopiiately be
seen as an outgiowth of the novel in this laigei sense. Not, of couise, as
a meie extension oi iepetition of the conceins we have thus fai discussed,
but as a iesponse to the laigei challenges posed in the novel. Indeed, the
aimchaii anthiopologist who naiiates Crcwds and Pcwer iepiesents a veii-
table Anti-Kien in that his insatiable hungei foi the myths and legends of
Asia, Afiica, and the Ameiicas exemplies a constiuctive option to the euio-
centiic, misogynistic, and oiientalist peiveisions of his ctional piedeces-
soi.
76
This new kind of mythological method that chaiacteiizes the pages of
Crcwds and Pcwernot Eliots high modeinist veisionseeks to avoid the
subjectivist dangeis exhibited by both the Kien biotheis by diawing upon
the voices of the many, including emphatically those of the non-Euiopean
c.i11i s ..iv1i c.i moiivi sm : :o,
peoples, past and piesent. If this can be seen as Canettis eoit to iedeemiea-
sonandiedene cultuie, it is a maikedly liteiaiyandpoetic undeitaking as
well. Foi this anthiopological studyif we can aftei all call it thatnot only
eschews the accustomed scholaily appaiatus in favoi of masteiful and iivet-
ing stoiytelling, but invokes the soveieigntyof the poet inspiingingsome-
times capiiciously and bemusinglyfiom insight to insight. As the novel is
unchaiacteiistically analytical, this cioss-cultuial and inteidisciplinaiy in-
quiiy into the natuie of masses and the souices of powei is imbued with
unexpected inections of the poetic. And while Crcwds and Pcwer in a sense
iebus the novels piotagonist, it also iepiises him: this studys ambition,
eiudition, and, yes, bombast evoke nothing if not the ghost of Petei Kien.
Crcwds and Pcwer ventuies this answei to the question posed in the
novelan incomplete answei, to be suie (Canetti had planned a second
volume), but one that is based on a dauntingly expansive suivey of woild
mythology, folkloie, and anthiopological iepoits: We aie by natuie social,
and this is a fundamental chaiacteiistic, not an epiphenomenon of diive-
sublimation, as Fieud would have it. Fuitheimoie, we possess the piimal
ability to evolve towaid highei foims. In naming this most optimistic of
qualities, Canetti boiiowed a teim fiom his beloved Kafka, Verwandlung,
theieby chaiacteiistically encoding a waining even at his most sanguine mo-
ment: the potential foi human metamoiphosis can go eithei way. Canettis
postulation of the tiansfoimative powei iecoided in myth comes only aftei
hundieds of pages documenting patteins of atiocityand baibaiism. It oeis,
nally, a whiof optimism, a modicumof hope that contiasts staikly with
and iesponds tothe novels daik and unpiomising ending. In this way,
then, Canettis peisonal depaituie fiom liteiaiy modeinism set the couise
foi a cieative new beginning.
o1is
In the notes, AF iefeis to Autc-da-Fe, the Wedgwood English tianslation,
DB iefeis to Die Blendung, the Geiman oiiginal, as cited in the bibliogiaphy.
vvii.ci
I. Denby, Leaining to Love Canetti, Io,.
:. Up until I,,_, the Haivaid Depaitment of Geimanic Languages and Liteia-
tuies listed Autc-da-Fe as a postwai novel on its ieading list foi giaduate students.
_. Kimball, Becoming Elias Canetti, I,.
i1voi0c1io
I. Kimball, Becoming Elias Canetti, :_.
:. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, _,.
_. Ibid., :.
. See Daibys suivey of the scholaily liteiatuie in Structures cf Disintegraticn,
II,, and Gopfeit, Canetti Lesen.
,. Jay makes this point in both The Dialectical Imaginaticn and Adcrnc.
o. Kimball, foi example, iemaiks: In tone, outlook, and textuie, Autc-da-Fe
may be desciibed as a cioss between Kafka . . . and the Boiges of stoiies like
The Libiaiy of Babel (Becoming Elias Canetti, :_). Similaily, Denby obseives:
The gieat Euiopean modeinistsYeats, Kafka, Mann, Musiltook on the bui-
den of Euiopes disintegiation, Canetti, who had soiiowfully watched Austiia fall
apait between the wais, also sounds the authentic note of despaii, the anguish of
an impassioned humanism at bay (Leaining to Love Canetti, Io,).
,. Quoted in Rodney Livingstone, Biechts Me-ti, o8.
8. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, I:.
,. Ibid., I,o.
Io. Ibid., I,o,,.
II. Gopfeit, Reception Histoiy, _o.
I:. Ibid., _I:.
I_. Ibid., _o:.
:o8 : o1is 1o v.cis I I I ,
I. Ein Dichter gegen Macht und Tcd.
I,. Gopfeit, Reception Histoiy, _o.
Io. Foi this stoiy, as well as a souice iich with eaily ieception data, see Weis-
manns Veisuch.
I,. Gopfeit, Reception Histoiy, :,_.
I8. Quoted in Petei Russell, The Vision of Man, _o.
I,. Reich-Ranicki, in Ein Dichter gegen Macht und Tcd, iemaiks: Es ist ein
ganz gioei Entwuif ubei die Tiagodie des Intellektuellen in unseiem Jahihun-
deit, eine Paiabel von hochstei Ambition.
:o. Enzensbeigei, Elias Canetti, 8.
:I. Examples can be found in Bainouw, Elias Canetti, :,, and Loienz, Bezuge
zwischen Roman und Massentheoiie, 8,.
::. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, 8,.
:_. See Muiphy, Canetti and Nietzsche. Foi a moie in-depth assessment of Mui-
phys monogiaph see Dagmai C. G. Loienzs ieview in German uarterly ,I.:
(Spiing I,,8).
:. Foi a fullei account of Geiman liteiaiy modeinismthan I can piovide heie,
see Steven Dowden, Sympathy fcr the Abyss.
:,. Dominick LaCapia and Waltei Cohen, foi example, take New Histoiicism
to task foi fosteiing facile associationism as well as aibitiaiy connectedness,
in Cohn, Optics and Powei in the Novel, ,o.
:o. Foi example, Geoig Eislei iemaiks, in Ein Dichter gegen Macht und Tcd.
Canetti ist eminent weltanschaulich. Seine Aibeiten entstehen auf Giund einei
sehi intensiven Betiachtung, eines sehi intensiven Anschauens, dei Welt. Schein-
bai steht ei etwas abseits. Abei diese bohiende Ait sich Fiagen zu stellen, sich mit
demWahigenommenen auseinandeizustellen, geht natuilich auch ins Politische,
ins in jedei Hinsicht Weltanschauliche.
cu.v1iv I
I. Canetti, Das eiste Buch, :,o.
:. Ibid.
_. Ibid.
. Lieweischeidt, Ein Wideispiuch, _,o.
,. Daiby, Structures cf Disintegraticn, IoI. Foi a contiastive study of naiiation
in Canettis two majoi woiks, see Weilens Narrative Strategies.
o. Canetti, Das eiste Buch, :. Heie Canetti mentions also his tianslations
of the Ameiican populai iealist authoi Upton Sinclaii foi the leftist Malik Veilag
of Beilin, :8,.
,. Ibid., :,.
8. Canetti, Autc-da-Fe, _8. Hencefoith all iefeiences to the Wedgwood tiansla-
o1is 1o v.cis :o:: : :o,
tion will be abbieviated as AF. Those instances wheie I have modied Wedgwood
aie indicated by tians. iev. The Geiman text, cited in the notes accoiding to
the edition listed in the bibliogiaphy, is abbieviated as DB, as in the following:
Sollte es zu spat sein, dachte ei, wie alt mag sie sein: Leinen kann man immei.
Mit einfachen Romanen mute sie beginnen (DB, _,).
,. AF, _,, DB, _o.
Io. AF, :, Fui sie kam blo ein Roman in Betiacht. Nui wiid von Romanen
kein Geist fett. Den Genu, den sie vielleicht bieten, ubeizahlt man sehi: sie zei-
setzen den besten Chaiaktei. Man leint sich in alleilei Menschen einfuhlen. Am
vielen Hin und Hei gewinnt man Geschmack. Man lost sich in die Figuien auf,
die einem gefallen. Jedei Standpunkt wiid begieiich. Willig ubeilat man sich
fiemden Zielen und veilieit fui langei die eigenen aus dem Auge. Romane sind
Keile, die ein schieibendei Schauspielei in die geschlossene Peison seinei Lesei
tieibt. Je bessei ei Keil und Wideistand beiechnet, um so gespaltenei lat ei die
Peison zuiuck. Romane muten von Staats wegen veiboten sein (DB, I:).
II. Teiiy Eagleton tells the stoiy of the iise of English liteiatuie as an academic
discipline in the Biitish univeisitywhich occuiied concuiiently with the wiiting
of Autc-da-Fe (I,_o_I)in his The Rise of English, in Literary Thecry, I,,_.
I:. AF, _, Sie schlug das Buch auf, las laut: Die Hosen . . ., unteibiach
sich und wuide nicht iot. Ihi Gesicht bedeckte sich mit einem leichten Schwei
(DB, _).
I_. Roswitha las den Zettel duich und schnitt in dei andeien Stube die letzte
Zeile foit, sie genieite sich ihiet- und ihiei Fiau wegen, den Zettel in seinei ui-
spiunglichen Gestalt abzugeben. In Fontane, E Briest, I,8.
I. E instiucts Roswitha: du mut mii nun auch Buchei besoigen, es wiid
nicht schwei halten, ich will alte, ganz alte (ibid., I,8). Fontane has included in
this iemaik a baib against Alexis, with whom he felt a iivaliy (see below): He has
Esuggest that it wont be dicult to nd this Alexis novel in the libiaiy, because
it is so dated. In this Fontane was simply wiong: Alexiss populaiity continued
unabatedeven incieasedduiing the Weimai peiiod (see below).
I,. Five times in Book I (DB, :, _, ,, ,, I:I), and thiee times in Book _ (DB,
_,,, ,,, ,8).
Io. The nineteenth-centuiy tendency to constiuct an idealized liteiaiy past
quite in contiast to histoiical iealityis well documented with iegaid to the
Ghettogeschichte by Gabiielle von Glasenapp in hei monogiaph Aus der }uden-
gasse.
I,. Thomas, The Liteiaiy Reputation of Willibald Alexis, I,,.
I8. Adolf Stein wiites that Alexis waid nach einei ublen Gewohnheit . . . nui
allzu oft als dei deutsche Waltei Scott bezeichnet (in Thomas, ibid., :Io n. _).
I,. Ibid., I,,.
:o. Lynne Tatlock obseives: To this day he is iemembeied, if at all, as the Gei-
man Waltei Scott. Wheieas in oui own time his name means nothing to the gen-
:Io : o1is 1o v.cis :: :8
eial public, educated Geimans of an oldei geneiation tend to know the histoiical
novel, Die Hcsen des Herrn vcn Bredcw (Villibald Alexis Zeitrcman Das Haus
Dusterweg and the Vcrmarz, _).
:I. This and the following publication infoimation culled fiom Reinhaid
Obeischelp, ed., Gesamtverzeichnis, I8I,. Despite its title, this catalogue is not
ieliably compiehensive. Fuitheimoie, piinting quantities aie only haphazaidly
given. Neveitheless, the global impiession is that Die Hcsen did a consideiable
business in the I,:os.
::. Though my account of the novels publication histoiy bieaks o heie, one
might note that Die Hcsen des Herrn vcn Bredcw continued to be issued thiough-
out the Nazi peiiod.
:_. Theodoi Fontane, Willibald Alexis, ::.
:. Alexis, Die Hcsen, ,. Though no date of publication is piinted in the book,
I,:o is the yeai given in the Gesamtverzeichnis foi the Insel piinting of ::. bis :o.
Tausend, which is piinted on the nal page of this edition.
:,. Ibid., :,.
:o. Ibid., 8, ,.
:,. Ibid., o.
:8. Der blaue Engel opened in Beilin in I,_o, though, of couise, Heiniich
Manns novel, on which the lm is loosely based, had alieady appeaied almost
twenty-veyeais eailiei. Raths enchantment at heaiing the school giils sing Ann-
chen von Thaiau gives us an idea of the text thiough which he saw Lola-Lola.
:,. With the metamoiphosis of an obedient seivant into a destioying shiew,
Canetti combines gendei iepiesentations often iigidly sepaiated, namely the
ieal subseivient woman as against the mythic she-devil. On this see Maiia
Tatai, Wie su ist es, sich zu opfein: Gendei, Violence, and Agency in Doblins
Berlin Alexanderplatz, ,I.
_o. Foi an account and ciitical appiaisal of this debate, see Saul Fiiedlandei,
Prcbing the Limits cf Representaticn, especially I:I.
_I. Quoted in Thomas, The Liteiaiy Reputation of Willibald Alexis, I,,.
_:. Ibid., I,o.
__. Tatlock (Willibald Alexis and Young Geimany, _o,) quotes Alexis him-
self on the collapse of the two time levels (the histoiical peiiod tieated and the
peiiod in which the novel is wiitten) in this genie: denn ist nicht jede Novelle
Roman sic] eigentlich eine Zeitnovelle, wenn dei Autoi seine subjektive Auf-
fassung in dei Behandlung des Themas, moge es noch so weit in dei Zeit zuiuck-
liegen, aus dei Zeit, in dei ei lebt, mit heieinbiingt:
_. Thomas, The Liteiaiy Reception of Willibald Alexis, :o:.
_,. Nattei, Literature at Var, :o8.
_o. AF, II, my emphasis, In dei Liste dei gefallenen Buchei guiieite als
Nummei _, ein dickei, altei Band ubei Bewanung und Taktik dei Landes-
knechte. Kaum wai ei mit schweiem Kiach ubei die Leitei gekolleit, als die
blasenden Hausbesoigei sich in Landsknechte veiwandelten. Eine ungeheuie Be-
o1is 1o v.cis :8_ I : :II
geisteiung packte Kien. Dei Hausbesoigei wai ein Landsknecht, was denn sonst:
. . . Da jagte ihm die Faust keinen Schiecken mehi ein. Voi ihm sa eine wohl-
veitiaute histoiische Figui. Ei wute, was sie tun und was sie lassen wuide . . .
Aimei, zu spat geiatenei Keil, kam da als Landsknecht im zwanzigsten Jahihun-
deit auf die Welt . . . ausgestoen aus dem Sakulum, fui das ei geschaen wai,
veischlagen in ein andeies, wo ei immei fiemd blieb! In der harmlcsen Ferne des
beginnenden :o. }ahrhunderts schmclz der Hausbescrger zu nichts zusammen, ei
mochte piahlen, soviel ei wollte. Um eines Menschen Herr zu werden, genugt es,
ihn histcrisch einzureihen (DB, II,:o, my emphasis).
_,. DB, I,.
_8. Canetti visits the issues of Veigangenheit, histoiy, and histoiians iepeat-
edly in the Die Prcvinz des Menschen. Aufzeichnungen :;::;,: and he is invaii-
ably negative. Canetti chaiges histoiians with pieseiving and piopagating iela-
tionships of powei, foi failing to see what could have been (i.e., foi encouiaging
the sense of histoiical inevitability), and foi cieating a false sense of secuiity: Die
Geschichte gibt den Menschen ihi falsches Veitiauen zuiuck (,o). Othei pei-
tinent passages can be found at I_, _:__ (wheie Canetti compaies histoiians to
blind teimites who consume each otheis waste), _o, ,I.
_,. See also Kiens paean to the past fiom the chaptei Die Eistaiiung: An
allen Schmeizen ist die Gegenwait schuld. Ei sehnt sich nach dei Zukunft, weil
dann mehi Veigangenheit auf dei Welt sein wiid. Die Veigangenheit ist gut, sie tut
niemand was zuleid, zwanzig Jahie hat ei sich fiei in ihi bewegt, ei wai glucklich
. . . Ei beugt sich voi dem Piimat dei Veigangenheit (DB, Io,).
o. AF, _,8, Lesen als Stieicheln, eine andeie Foimdei Liebe, fui Damen und
Damenaizte, zu deien Beiuf feines Veistandnis fui die intime Lektuie dei Dame
gehoite (DB, _o).
I. DB, _,, AF, _,8.
:. AF, _,8,,, Die besten Romane waien die, in denen die Menschen amge-
wahltesten spiachen . . . Eine solche Aufgabe bestand daiin, die zackige, schmeiz-
liche, beiende Vielgestalt des Lebens, das einen umgab, auf eine glatte Papieie-
bene zu biingen, ubei die es sich iasch und angenehm hinweglas . . . je oftei
ein Geleise befahien wai, um so dieienzieitei die Lust, die man ihm abgewann
. . . Geoiges Kien hatte als Fiauenaizt begonnen. Seine Jugend und Schonheit
fand ungeheuien Zulauf. In jenei Peiiode, die nui wenige Jahie daueite, eigab ei
sich den Romanen Fiankieichs, an seinem Eifolg hatten sie wesentlichen Anteil
. . . Von zahllosen Fiauen, zu seinem Dienst beieit, umgeben, veiwohnt, ieich,
wohleizogen, lebte ei wie Piinz Gautama, bevoi ei Buddah wuide. Kein besoigtei
Vatei und Fuist schlo ihn vomElend dei Welt ab, ei sah Altei, Tod und Bettlei, so
viele, da ei sie nicht mehi sah. Abgeschlossen wai ei doch, abei duich die Buchei,
die ei las, die Satze, die ei spiach, die Fiauen, die sich als gieiige, geschlossene
Mauei um ihn stellten (DB, _o).
_. Davis, Resisting Ncvels, I:.
. Davis obseives that Identication, . . . a] majoi defense, in which we
:I: : o1is 1o v.cis _ I _o
convince ouiselves that we aie like ceitain ideal guies, is so cleaily a featuie of
novel ieading that fuithei discussion is not necessaiy . . . Suce it to say that a
novel can baiely succeed unless we place ouiselves in some special ielation to the
heio oi heioine (ibid., :I).
,. Ibid., I:,.
o. Bainouw, Elias Canetti, :8.
,. AF, _,,, DB, _:.
8. AF, _,o, Ei wai gio, staik, feuiig und sichei, in seinen Zugen lag etwas
von jenei Weichheit, die Fiauen benotigen, um sich bei einem Manne heimisch
zu fuhlen. Wei ihn sah, nannte ihn den Adam des Michelangelo (DB, __).
,. Davis notes that ideologically speaking, then, chaiactei gives ieadeis faith
that peisonality is, ist, undeistandable and, second, capable of iational change.
As pait of the geneial ideology of middle-class individualism, the idea that the
subject might be foimed fiom social foices and that change might have to come
about thiough social change is by and laige absent fiom novels. Change is always
seen as eected by the individual (Resisting Ncvels, my emphasis, II,).
,o. Gopfeit, Reception Histoiy, :,,.
,I. Ibid., _o_.
,:. Geoigs self-image as insightful Menschenkennei can be found at AF,
:o, and DB, oo. The ciitics love aaii with Geoig has continued down to Wal-
tei Sokel (I,,) and Russell Beiman (I,8o), both of whomwill be discussed in the
following chaptei.
,_. AF, :Io, Sichei sind Sie ein gutei Laufei! Fischeile duichschaute die Falle
und eiwideite: Was soll ich lugen: Wenn Sie einen Schiitt machen, mach ich
einen halben. In dei Schule wai ich immei dei schlechteste Laufei. Ei dachte sich
den Namen einei Schule aus, fui den Fall, da ihn Kien danach fiagte: in Wiik-
lichkeit hatte ei nie eine besucht. Abei Kien schlug sich eben mit wichtigeien
Gedanken namely the memoiy of his own physical shoitcomings] heium. Er
stand vcr dem grcten Vertrauensbeweis seines Lebens. Ich glaube Ihnen! sagte ei
schlicht. Fischeile fiohlockte (DB, ::,, my emphasis).
,. AF, :,,, weil ihm ihie Empoiung geel (:,,), tians. iev.
,,. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, I_:.
,o. Davis, Resisting Ncvels, Io:oI, especially I:,.
,,. Ibid., I_,.
,8. Ibid., I_8.
,,. Alexis, Die Hcsen, o:.
oo. Ibid., I8,.
oI. Ibid., Io.
o:. Ibid., ,.
o_. Davis, Resisting Ncvels, I:.
o. AF, IoI,, my emphasis, tians. iev. Readeis of English may not immedi-
ately iecognize Wedgwoods Mut Stiasse as iefeiiing to a city stieet (Strae
stieet), and may also wish to know that theie is some iiony in the choice of this
o1is 1o v.cis _o_, : :I_
name, which, though also a piopei name (i.e., a ieal Viennese stieet name), lit-
eially means couiage stieet, indicating a quality totally lacking in the piotago-
nist. Da iief jemand laut jemand andein an: Konnen Sie mii sagen, wo hiei
die Mutstiae ist: Dei Gefiagte entgegnete nichts. Kien wundeite sich, da gab es
auf oenei Stiae ncch auer ihm schweigsame Menschen. Ohne aufzublicken,
hoichte ei hin. Wie wuide sich dei Fiagende zu diesei Stummheit veihalten: . . .
Wiedei sagte ei nichts. Kien belobte ihn . . . Noch immei sagte dei zweite nichts
. . . Dei Voigang spielte zu seinei Rechten. Doit tobte dei eiste: Sie haben kein
Benehmen! . . . Dei zweite schwieg . . . Da bekam Kien einen bosen Sto . . . Dei
zweite, dei Schweigei und Chaiaktei, dei seinen Mund auch imZoin beheiischte,
wai Kien selbst (DB, II,, my emphasis).
o,. Daiby, Structures cf Disintegraticn, :,.
oo. Alexis, Die Hcsen, ,,, ,o.
o,. Ibid., ,o,,.
o8. Ibid., o8.
o,. Foi the paiallel stoiy, see ibid., 8,8,. Schneidei Wiedeband, like Hed-
deiich, is accused of selling fiaudulent aiticles of clothing. Because of his talents
as a tailoi, and because die sachsischen Heiien enjoyed playing him o against
dievonBeelitz, Wiedebandwas able tobuy himself intonobility. But whenhe at-
tempts ievenge on his oppiessois la Michael Kohlhaas, both paities tuin against
him, and he is hanged.
,o. The exchange in Geiman iuns as follows: Plagt dei Teufel den alten Kiip-
penieitei, da ei einemJuden auaueit, dei mit seinemWagen nach Beilin fahit.
Einem Juden. Odei so was (ibid., ::o).
,I. Ibid., ::I:, see also ::,8.
,:. An examination of Alexiss political aliations can be found in Tatlock,
Willibald Alexis and Young Geimany.
,_. See Hal Diapei, Maix and the Economic-Jew Steieotype, in Karl Marxs
Thecry cf Revcluticn, I:,,Ioo8.
,. Alexis, Die Hcsen, ::I:.
,,. On this see Michael Biennei, After the Hclccaust.
,o. Alexis, Die Hcsen, I::_:.
,,. Thomass statement on Alexiss love of impaitiality ceitainly does not
extend to this novels anti-Semitism, noi does it seem appiopiiate in geneial to
Die Hcsen. See The Liteiaiy Reception of Willibald Alexis, :o,.
,8. See also Alexis, Die Hcsen, ::I,,. Any ciitical position one might attempt to
iead into this iepiesentation seems fuithei disallowed by Alexiss conception of
the heio as the iepiesentative of the ieadei, just as the choius in ancient tiagedy
typies public opinion (Thomas, The Liteiaiy Reception of Willibald Alexis,
:Io).
,,. See, foi example, Alexis, Die Hcsen, ::,,, which maiks the beginning of a
passage that moves Lindenbeig into a distinctly moie positive light by poitiaying
him as the enlightenei of the youthful iulei.
:I : o1is 1o v.cis _,
8o. Ibid., o:, o.
8I. Though also spiinkled thioughout the book, such gnomic utteiances can
be found at I:_o (ckle human natuie), I:,: (von Biedow as a dimwit), I:oo
(simple living is best).
8:. Gilman, Dierence and Pathclcgy.
8_. Some examples of Theiese-focalization buiied within an appaiently objec-
tive naiiative voice can be found at DB, __ (the investigation), 8o8I (the fuini-
tuie shopping excuision), and Io, (the discoveiy of Kien aftei his accident in the
libiaiy). One example of unmaiked Kien focalization is at DB, I8I8:, otheis aie
stiewn thioughout the novel.
8. AF, _,o, in seinen Zugen lag etwas von jenei Weichheit, die Fiauen be-
notigen, um sich bei einem Manne heimisch zu fuhlen (DB, __).
8,. Foi a concise oveiview of these two Genettian teims (zeio focalization,
inteinal focalization) as well as Stanzels paiallel categoiies, see Doiiit Cohn,
Optics and Powei in the Novel. A moie extensive tieatment of these key naiia-
tological teims can be found in Cohns classic Transparent Minds.
8o. See Canettis I,o, essay Realismus und neue Wiiklichkeit.
8,. Canetti, Das eiste Buch, :,.
cu.v1iv :
I. Sontag, Mind as Passion, 88.
:. AF, ,, Du bist immei hoich, du Weib, du bist wie die Eva . . . Ruh dich
doch von dei Weiblichkeit aus! Vielleicht wiist du wiedei ein Mensch (DB, 88).
The title quotation is also spoken by Petei Kien to biothei Geoig. The Geiman
oiiginal has a somewhat dieient avoi: Eigentlich bist du eine Fiau. Du bestehst
aus Sensationen (DB, ,,).
_. Lawson, Understanding Elias Canetti, 8.
. Ibid., I.
,. Feiiaia, Giotesque and Voiceless, 8o, ,_.
o. Foell, Blind Reecticns, I8o. Foell ieaches a similai conclusion iegaiding a
sexual encountei between Theiese and Pfa: Canetti pieseives the distance to
Theiese, leaving the ieadei disgusted at hei . . . iathei than sympathetic with hei
as victim of sexual assault. In eect, he peipetuates the myth that women want
it (I_,). Though Foell claims to oei a moie dieientiated view(i.e., that Canetti
both actively ciiticizes and passively ieects ieigning gendei theoiies of his day),
the net eect of hei study is to suggest that even in those cases wheie she pei-
ceives Canetti to have oeied some ievision of Weiningei, that position is still
decidedly misogynistic (see, foi example, ,,, Ioo, I8, I,, I88). Moie iecently,
Foell espouses the cuiious notion that Autc-da-Fe does not qualify as satiie be-
cause it cannot be a means of satiie when the object of satiie (heie Weiningeis
W) is itself an absuid exaggeiation, see Whoies, Motheis, and Otheis, :8
o1is 1o v.cis , _ : :I,
,_. This stands in staik contiast to the moie convincing position taken by Elfiiede
Podei in Spuiensicheiung.
,. Sontag, who once supposed that the novel is animated by an exceptionally
inventive hatied foi women (Mind as Passion, ,:), appeais iepeatedly as a kind
of inspiiation in subsequent feminist analyses of Autc-da-Fe. What hei disciples
have oveilooked, howevei, is the moie sophisticated life and woik model im-
plicit in Sontags essay. Reecting on language common to both the novel and the
published notebooks (Die Aufzeichnungen), Sontag notes: And this was not lan-
guage suitable only foi the mad bookman, Canetti latei used it in his notebooks
to desciibe himself, as when he called his life nothing but a despeiate attempt to
think about eveiything so that it comes togethei in a head and thus becomes one
again, aiming the veiy fantasy he had pilloiied in Autc-da-Fe (ibid., ,_). This
appioach to life and woik, which is at once aleit to inconsistencies and thematic
paiallels yet opposed to ieductionist equations, seems to me the most piomising
foi futuie Canetti scholaiship, paiticulaily as we anticipate the publication of the
Nachla as well as a tiuly ciitical biogiaphy.
8. Felman, Tuining the Sciew of Inteipietation, Io,.
,. Feiiaia simply thinks that the novels men aie tieated bettei by the naiiatoi,
who, foi hei, is inteichangeable with Canetti himself (Giotesque and Voiceless,
8o8,, ,:). Foell assumes a naiiatoi so in chaige of the stoiy that silence itself tac-
itly endoises a characters misogynistic views. When Fischeile insults the school
teachei by assuming she is a whoie (iecall that Fischeile thinks eveiy woman is a
whoie), Foell iushes to hei defense, lest the hapless ieadei be peisuaded to adopt
Fischeiles opinion: The joke is at the teacheis expense . . . , we aie told, leaving
the ieadei with Fischeiles viewpoint (which the naiiatoi does not contiadict)
that this is not a ieal woman because she is not a whoie, not conceined with hei
attiactiveness to men (ibid., II, see also 8:).
Io. On this see Foell (Blind Reecticns, I:,, I_,, I_,), who pioposes that Kien
is indeed an identication guie capable of inspiiing misogyny in the ieadei.
II. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, o.
I:. Bellei, Otto Weiningei as Libeial:
I_. AF, I8, DB, :oo:oI.
I. Bionfen, Over Her Dead Bcdy, I,.
I,. Ibid., I8.
Io. AF, I,,, DB, I,:. The mothei-son ielationship is aiticulated latei in the
same chaptei: Sie hatte das Gefuhl, da sie ammiiatenen Teil ihies Kindes mit-
schuldig sei (DB, I,,).
I,. AF, _,,, Unteis Bett wai ei zum Abschied gein gekiochen, weil ei doit in
dei Wiege seinei Laufbahn lag. Da . . . heiischte eine Ruhe wie in keinem Kaee-
haus (DB, _88).
I8. Tatai, The Hard Facts cf the Grimms Fairy Tales, ,I.
I,. Ibid., I8:.
:o. Ibid., I,.
:Io : o1is 1o v.cis , _oo
:I. AF, _o8, Bald nach diesei Veiandeiung staib die Fiau, voi Ubeianstien-
gung . . . Am Tage nach dei Beeidigung begann sein Wonnemond. Ungestoitei
als bishei veifuhi ei mit dei Tochtei nach Belieben (DB, o:).
::. Tatai, The Hard Facts cf the Grimms Fairy Tales, I,o.
:_. Ibid., I,:,_.
:. AF, _,o, Das Futtei gibt ihi . . . dei gute Vatei. [ Die Mannei wollen
sie . . . gai nicht haben. . . . [ Jetzt wiid sie dei Vatei gleich . . . veihaften. [
Auf dem Vatei seinem Scho sitzt . . . die biave Tochtei. [ Dei Vatei wei,
waium ei sie . . . schlagt. [ Ei tut dei Tochtei gai nicht . . . weh. [ Dafui
leint sie, was sich beim . . . Vatei gehoit (DB, o,).
:,. Concluding fiom Coxs study of _, vaiiants of Cindeiella, Tatai ob-
seives: Cindeiella and hei folkloiistic sisteis aie theiefoie almost as likely to ee
the household because of theii fatheis peiveise eiotic attachment to them oi be-
cause of his insistence on a veibal declaiation of love as they aie to be banished to
the heaith and degiaded to domestic seivitude by an ill-tempeied stepmothei
(The Hard Facts cf the Grimms Fairy Tales, I,_). Tatais analysis of the potential
complementaiity of the incestuous fathei[jealous mothei plots ieminds us that
these may not, theiefoie, iepiesent disciete alteinative plots at the level of psychic
motivation.
:o. AF, ,, tians. iev., DB, ,.
:,. AF, I:I, DB, I:,.
:8. AF, _, Umstandlich suchte sie ein passendes Stuck Packpapiei] aus und
legte es dem Buche um, wie einem Kind ein Kleid . . . Ei hatte sie unteischatzt.
Sie behandelte die Buchei bessei als ei (DB, :).
:,. Hauptmann employed this same female type elsewheie, as Kail S. Guthke
has suggested, namely in the guie of Hanne Schal (Fiau Henschel), fiom Fuhr-
mann Henschel (I8,8).
_o. Downing, Repetition and Realism.
_I. Hauptmann, Bahnwarter Thiel, ::,, my emphasis. The Geiman gives a
slightly cleaiei sense of Lenes sexuality: Diei Dinge jedoch hatte ei, ohne es
zu wissen, mit seinei Fiau in Kauf genommen: eine haite, heiischsuchtige Ge-
mutsait, Zanksucht und brutale Leidenschaftlichkeit. Nach Veilauf eines halben
Jahies wai es oitsbekannt, wei in demHauschen des Waiteis das Regiment fuhite.
Man bedaueite den Waitei.
_:. Foi example, Weilen, Narrative Strategies, I:.
__. Hauptmann, Bahnwarter Thiel, :_o.
_. Ibid., :_8.
_,. Foi moie on this see Miedei, Spuien dei schwaizen Spinne.
_o. I exploie this issue in gieatei depth in The Kiss of the Spidei Woman.
_,. AF, _:, tians. iev., In dei Spinne, dem giausamsten und halichsten allei
Tieie, sehe ich die veikoipeite Weiblichkeit. Ihi Netz schilleit in dei Sonne giftig
und blau (DB, ,,).
_8. Regaiding poinogiaphy, Stewait wiote in the famous I,o case of }accbellis
o1is 1o v.cis ooo_ : :I,
v. Ohic. I shall not today attempt fuithei to dene the kinds of mateiial I undei-
stand to be embiaced within that shoithand desciiption, and peihaps I could
nevei succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it.
_,. Ryan, Vanishing Subject, o::, a somewhat fullei tieatment of this topic can
be found in hei Viennese Psychology and Ameiican Piagmatism.
o. Ryan, Vanishing Subject, :I.
I. Foi Weiningei, the Jew no less than Woman iepiesents the spectei of
the disunied empiiical self. On the Jewas the quintessential Machian (oi empiii-
cal) self, see Bellei, Vienna and the }ews, ::. The opposition between the empiii-
cal and ethical selves is of cential concein in Belleis Otto Weiningei as Libeial:
:. In Ein Dichter gegen Macht und Tcd, poet Eiich Fiied insightfully iefeis
to Klaus Theweleit as Canettis iebellious student. Yet the anity goes well be-
yond meie liteiaiy foim(i.e., similai kinds of eclecticismand idiosynciatic essay-
istic foim in both Masse und Macht and Mannerphantasien Male Fantasies]) to
include a shaied analysis of misogyny as iooted in a male identity ciisis. Thus
Theweleits Male Fantasies is indebted as much to Autc-da-Fe as it is to Masse und
Macht.
_. An instiuctive suivey of Weiningeis consideiable inuence can be found
in Baibaia Hyams and Nancy A. Haiiowitz, A Ciitical Intioduction to the His-
toiy of Weiningei Reception.
. Bellei, Otto Weiningei as Libeial:, ,,.
,. Ibid., ,,.
o. Bellei elaboiates: Mans moital enemy is Woman, that is, the animal,
the mateiial, the eaithly in each individual. What woman ieally iepiesents is
Weiningeis feai that Mans highei self will be distiacted fiom the puisuit of
knowledge and meaning by the alluies of hedonistic pleasuie and the iiiational
iealm of feelings (ibid., ,8).
,. AF, :_,, tians. iev., Da dei Philologe in ihm noch lebte, beschlo ei, bis
iuhigeie Zeiten ins Land gekehit waien, eine von Giund auf neue, textkiitische
Unteisuchung dei Evangelien voizunehmen. . . . Ei fuhlte in sich Gelehisamkeit
genug, um das Chiistentum auf seinen wahien Uispiung zuiuckzufuhien, und
wenn ei auch nicht dei eiste wai, dei die wiiklichen Woite des Heilands in eine
Menschheit waif . . . so hote ei doch mit einigem inneien Giund, da seine
Deutung die letzte blieb (DB, :oI).
8. AF, _,I, DB, :8.
,. AF, _8,, Die Wissenschaft hat uns von Abeiglauben und Glauben befieit.
Sie gebiaucht immei die gleichenNamen, mit Voiliebe giiechisch-lateinische, und
meint damit die wiiklichen Dinge. Miveistandnisse sind unmoglich (DB, :I).
,o. AF, I, Immei wiedei zwang ei sich, nach denjapanischenHandschiiften
auf demTisch zu gieifen. Kam ei so weit, dann beiuhite ei sie und zog die Hand,
fast angewideit, gleich zuiuck. Was hatten die zu bedeuten: . . . Auf das begonnene
Manuskiipt malte ei, ganz gegen seine Gewohnheit, Zeichen, die keinen Sinn
eigaben (DB, I,_).
:I8 : o1is 1o v.cis o_o,
,I. AF, I_o_I, Es genugte ihm da sie schwieg. Zwischen China und Japan
sagte ei sich einmal, das sei dei Eifolg seinei klugen Politik . . . Viele Konjektuien
gelangen ihm in diesen Tagen. Einen unglaublich veiballhointen Satz stellte ei
in diei Stunden wiedei hei. Die iichtigen Buchstaben iegneten nui so aus seinei
Fedei . . . Alteie Litaneien meldeten sich in ihm zu Woit, daiubei veiga ei die
ihie (DB, I_8).
,:. Kien is heie iefeiiing to the discoveiy of Theieses nances, but the teim
even in this contextiemains apposite of his scholaily puisuits. AF, I, DB, I,_.
,_. AF, ,8, Sie ist das beste Mittel, um meine Bibliothek in Oidnung
zuhalten . . . Hatte ich eine Peison nach meinen Planen konstiuieit, sie waie nicht
so zweckmaig ausgefallen (DB, ,).
,. AF, I8, Damals spiach sie immei dasselbe, ei leinte ihie Woite auswendig
und wai genaugenommen Heii ubei sie . . . abei da begann Theiese wiedei zu
spiechen. Was sie sagte, wai unveistandlich und ubte despotische Gewalt ubei
ihn aus. Es lie sich nicht auswendig leinen und wei sah voiaus, was jetzt kam:
(DB, I,8).
,,. AF, _II, DB, _o, emphasis in oiiginal.
,o. AF, _,,, tians. iev., Ei unteisuchte seinTiugbild so lange, bis ei sich davon
ubeizeugte, was es wai. Ganz andeien Gefahien, schadhaften Texten, fehlenden
Zeilen, wai ei schon auf den Leib geiuckt. Ei entsann sich nicht, je veisagt zu
haben. Samtliche Aufgaben, die ei sich voigenommen hatte, waien gelost. Auch
den Moid betiachtete ei als eine eiledigte Angelegenheit. An einei Halluzination
zeibiach kein Kien . . . (DB, __o). On this topic see also DB, __8, _,.
,,. AF, ,, Buchei sind stumm, sie spiechen und sind stumm, das ist das
Gioaitige (DB, 8,, emphasis in oiiginal).
,8. AF, o_, Aus dei eisten Zeile lost sich ein Stab und schlagt ihmeine umdie
Ohien. Blei. Das tut weh. Schlag! Schlag! Noch einei. Noch einei. Eine Funote
tiitt ihn mit Fuen. Immei mehi. Ei taumelt. Zeilen und ganze Seiten, alles fallt
ubei ihn hei. Die schutteln und schlagen ihn, die beuteln ihn, die schleudein ihn
einandei zu. Blut . . . Zu Hilfe! Zu Hilfe! Geoig! (DB, ,o8).
,,. Tatai, Lustmcrd, Io.
oo. This incident is iecounted in DB, ,,,.
oI. Ibid., I8, o,, I8_.
o:. Ibid., I:o.
o_. AF, _::, Solche Sachen stehen in den Buchein (DB, _,:).
o. AF, _8, Geoig sah sich hiei als wichtigenTeil eines Mechanismus, den ein
andeiei zui Eihaltung seines bediohten Selbstgefuhls in Bewegung gesetzt hatte
(DB, 8I).
o,. In the most compelling chaptei of Lustmcrd, The Coipse Vanishes: Gen-
dei, Violence, and Agency in Alfied Doblins Berlin Alexanderplatz, Tatai con-
cludes: Fianz and Reinhold may be indicted by the naiiatoi and by the law foi
theii muideious impulses and actions towaid women, but the stoiies of theWhoie
of Babylon and Clytemnestia lift the buiden of guilt fiom theii shouldeis (I,I).
o1is 1o v.cis o,o, : :I,
oo. This misogynistic toui de foice concludes, it should be noted, with yet
anothei defense of the imagined Lustmoid: Seine Rede ging in die eines Veitei-
digeis ubei, dei voi Geiicht eiklait, waium sein Klient die damonische Fiau
eimoiden mute. Ihie Damonie eisieht man aus dem unzuchtigen Leben, das sie
gein gefuhit hatte, aus dei aufieizenden Kleidung . . . Welchei Mann hatte eine
solche Fiau nicht eimoidet: (DB, ,_).
o,. AF, 8, Das Mateiial wai gioei als sein Ha (DB, ,I, see also DB,
,8).
o8. AF, III, Am wohlsten fuhlte ei sich noch, wenn ei sie doit unteibiachte,
wo alles Platz fand, fui das ei tiotz Bildung und Veistand keine Eiklaiung wute.
Von dei Veiiuckten hatte ei ein giobes und einfaches Bild. Ei denieite sie als
Menschen, die das Wideispiechendste tun, doch fui alles dieselben Woite haben.
Nach diesei Denition wai Theieseim Gegensatz zu ihm selbstentschieden
veiiuckt (DB, IIo, see also DB, I8o).
o,. Gilbeit and Gubai, The Madwcman in the Attic.
,o. AF, _,,, Ei hielt es fui seine eigentliche Lebensaufgabe, das iiesige Ma-
teiial, ubei welches ei veifugte, als Stutze fui gangbaie Bezeichnungen zu veiwen-
den . . . Ei hing an dei Feitigkeit des Systems und hate Zweiei. Menschen, be-
sondeis Geisteskianke und Veibiechei, waien ihm gleichgultig . . . Sie liefeiten
Eifahiungen, aus denen Autoiitaten die Wissenschaft eibauten. Ei selbei wai eine
Autoiitat (DB, _:__).
,I. AF, _,o, Veiiuckt, sagte ei mit gioem Nachdiuck und blickte seine Fiau
duichdiingend und duichschauend an, sie eiiotete, veiiuckt weiden eben die
Menschen, die immei nui an sich denken. Iiisinn ist eine Stiafe fui Egoismus . . .
Andeies hatte ei seinei Fiau nicht zu sagen. Sie wai um dieiig Jahie jungei als
ei und veischonte seinen Lebensabend. Die eiste Fiau wai ihm duichgebiannt,
bevoi ei sie, wie spatei die zweite, in die eigene Anstalt steckte, als unheilbai
egoistisch. Die diitte, gegen die ei auei seinei Eifeisucht nichts imSchilde fuhite,
liebte Geoiges Kien (DB, __).
,:. AF, o, Ei tat ihnen den Geisteskianken] den Gefallen und fuhite sie
nach Agypten zuiuck. Die Wege, die ei dafui eisann, waien gewi so wundeibai
wie die des Heiin beim Auszug seines Volkes (DB, :).
,_. AF, o,, Seine Fachkollegen bestaunten und beneideten ihn . . . Man
beeilte sich, kleine BiockenvonseinemRuhmzueischnappen, indemmansichzu
ihm bekannte und seine Methoden in den veischiedenaitigsten Fallen eipiobte.
Dei Nobelpieis wai ihm sichei (DB, _).
,. AF, _,,, Von zahllosen Fiauen, zu seinem Dienst beieit, umgeben, vei-
wohnt, ieich, wohleizogen, ei] lebte wie Piinz Gautama, bevoi ei Buddha wuide
(DB, _o).
,,. The Wedgwood tianslation captuies the ieligious auia that attends Geoigs
iepudiation of women: He found the way to the wildeiness in his twenty-eighth
yeai (AF, _,,). The Geiman text contains many humoious iefeiences to ieli-
gious motifs in the suiiounding text, but not in the sentence itself: Den Weg in
::o : o1is 1o v.cis o,,:
seine Heimatlosigkeit fand ei mit :8 Jahien (DB, _o). Though Geoigs convei-
sion expeiience is thus iiddled with iiony, a numbei of ciitics take this tiansfoi-
mation quite seiiously. Hans Fabian, foi example, iefeis to it as Diesei Pioze
dei Lauteiung and pioceeds to identify it with Canettis eigene Einstellung. See
Fabian, Die Spiache bei Elias Canetti, ,o.
,o. AF, oI, tians. iev., Wenn dei Goiilla nui wiedei spiach! Voi diesemeinen
Wunsch veischwandenalle GedankenanZeitknappheit, Veipichtungen, Fiauen,
Eifolge, als hatte ei von Gebuit an den Menschen odei Goiilla gesucht, dei seine
eigene Spiache besa (DB, _,).
,,. Clovei, Men, Vcmen, and Chainsaws, ,,II_.
,8. Bellei, Otto Weiningei as Libeial:, ,,.
,,. AF, oI, o_, Jedei Silbe, die ei heivoistie, entspiach eine bestimmte
Bewegung. Fui Gegenstande schienen die Bezeichnungen zu wechseln. Das Bild
meinte ei hundeitmal und nannte es jedesmal veischieden, die Namen hingen
von dei Gebaide ab, mit dei ei hinwies . . . Die Gegenstande hatten . . . keine
eigentlichen Namen. Je nach dei Empndung, in dei sie tiieben, hieen sie. Ihi
Gesicht wechselte fui den Goiilla, dei ein wildes, gespanntes, gewitteiieiches
Leben fuhite. Sein Leben ging auf sie ubei, sie hatten aktiven Teil daian. Ei
bevolkeite zwei Zimmei mit einei ganzen Welt. Ei schuf, was ei biauchte, und
fand sich nach seinen sechs Tagen am siebenten daiin zuiecht. Statt zu iuhen,
schenkte ei dei Schopfung eine Spiache (DB, _,, I).
8o. Foi a somewhat dieient discussion of this concept with iefeience to Autc-
da-Fe, see Podei, Spuiensicheiung, ,,oo.
8I. AF, o_, DB, I.
8:. No ciitic has, to my knowledge, fully appieciated the extent towhich Geoig
actually cieates this woman to appease the hallucinations of his patient Jean (see
DB, ,, 8). The signicance of this episode lies not piimaiily in Jeans fantasy of
punishing the sexually digiessive woman (a paiallel to Kiens own hallucinatoiy
fantasies of punishing Theiese), noi in the fact that the assistants themselves make
so much of this tieatment as a test case of Geoigs theiapy, but iathei in the
fact that it piovides a fiame foi evaluating Geoigs musings on the ciowd (DB,
,,o). Foi a fullei tieatment of this point, see below, chaptei ,.
8_. DB, ,,, 88.
8. AF, _,,, Konige iedete ei unteitanigst als Euie Majestat an . . . Ei wuide
ihi einzigei Veitiautei . . . Ei beiiet sie . . . als hatte ei selbst ihie Wunsche, immei
ihi Ziel und ihien Glauben imAuge, voisichtig veischiebend . . . Mannein gegen-
ubei nie autoiitai . . . schlielich sei ei doch ihi Ministei, Piophet und Apostel,
odei zuweilen sogai dei Kammeidienei (DB, _).
8,. AF, I_, DB, ,:.
8o. AF, :I, tians. iev., Geoig dei Biudei eines Lustmoideis. Schlagzeilen
in allen Zeitungen . . . Rucktiitt von dei Leitung einei Iiienanstalt. Fehltiitt.
Scheidung. Assistentenals Nachfolgei. Die Kianken. . . Sie liebenihn, sie biauchen
ihn, ei daif sie nicht veilassen, ein Rucktiitt ist unmoglich . . . Peteis Aaie mu
o1is 1o v.cis ,_, , : ::I
geiegelt weiden . . . Er wai fui chinesische Schiiften da, Geoig fui Menschen. Petei
gehoit in eine geschlossene Anstalt . . . Seine Unzuiechnungsfahigkeit lat sich
beweisen. Auf keinen Fall tiitt Geoig von dei Leitung seinei Anstalt zuiuck (DB,
oooI).
8,. AF, ,o, Sehnsucht nach dem Oit, wo ei ein ebenso absolutei Heiischei
wai, wie Petei in seinei Bibliothek (DB, ,oo).
88. Sokel, The Ambiguity of Madness.
8,. Bainouw, Elias Canetti, :,:o.
,o. Beiman, The Rise cf the Mcdern German Ncvel, especially chaptei 8, The
Chaiismatic Novel: Robeit Musil, Heimann Hesse, and Elias Canetti, I,,:o.
,I. Notice in the following how Geoig ielates die Masse ist to the ma-
teinal and then to madness, a teim we have alieady established as, in the vo-
cabulaiy of the novel, intiinsically feminine: Die Menschheit bestand schon
lange, bevoi sie begiiich eifunden und veiwasseit wuide, als Mass. Sie biodelt,
ein ungeheueies, wildes, saftstiotzendes und heies Tiei in uns allen, sehi tief,
viel tiefei als die Muttei . . . Zahllose Menschen weiden veiiuckt, weil die Masse
in ihnen besondeis staik ist (DB, ,,o). Foi a discussion of the feminization
of the ciowd in the novel, see Beind Widdig, Mannerbunde und Massen. Below,
in chaptei ,, I develop fuithei the point that Geoig oeis us viitually no insight
on ciowd psychology, and that his views aie only supeicially similai to those
enunciated by Canetti in Crcwds and Pcwer.
,:. AF, II, tians. iev., Zahllose Menschen weiden veiiuckt, weil die Masse
in ihnen besondeis staik ist und keine Befiiedigung ndet. . . . Fiuhei hatte ei
peisonlichen Neigungen, seinemEhigeiz und den Fiauen gelebt, jetzt lag ihmnui
daian, sich unaufhoilich zu veilieien. In diesei Tatatigkeit kamei Wunschen und
Sinnen dei Masse nahei, als die ubiigen einzelnen, von denen ei umgeben wai
(DB, ,o).
cu.v1iv _
I. Denby, Leaining to Love Canetti, IIo.
:. My nonliteial tianslation aims to captuie the spiiit of Canettis iemaik,
compaie Das Augenspiel, I_I.
_. Ibid., I:.
. Kiens inteiest in ancient Chinese texts indicates his total iemove fiom con-
tempoiaiy conceins, and thus is not unielated to the novels ciitique in this ie-
gaid. Yet a caieful ieading of the novel ieveals that Kiens status as sinologist
is moie iefeiied to than illustiated. The intellectual tiadition associated piin-
cipally with Kien and moie consistently at stake thioughout the novel is neo-
Kantianism, as I aigue below. Neveitheless, Kiens bastaidization of Confucianism
piesents, as Ning Ying obseives (China und Elias Canetti, I,,), a cleai paiallel
to his capiicious use of the Westein philosophical tiadition: Kien veihalt sich
::: : o1is 1o v.cis , ,8I
tatsachlich nicht iigoios konfuzianisch, wahiend ei immei von den Ratschlagen
dei chinesischen Gelehiten iedet.
,. The single episode which has thus fai inspiied a philosophical appioach
is Kiens pointedly pseudophilosophical diatiibe against Theieses blendende
Mobel (DB, ,o,_), see Daiby, Peiception and Peispective in Beikeley and
Canetti.
o. In a iaie moment of self-depiecation, Canetti iemaiks: Ich hatte, wenn ich
es heute zu bemessen veisuche, noch wenig geleint und jedenfalls nichts von dem,
was sein besondeies Wissen ausmachte: die zeitgenossische Philosophie. Seine
Bibliothek wai hauptsachlich eine philosophische, ei scheute im Gegensatz zu
mii voi dei Welt dei Begiie nicht zuiuck, ei gab sich ihnen hin wie andeie dem
Besuch von Nachtlokalen (Das Augenspiel, :,). Elsewheie in the autobiogiaphy
Canetti iemaiks that he is simply not a Begiismensch.
,. Regaiding the piofessoi of philosophy, Oskai Kiaus, Canetti wiites: Da ei
sich bei jedei Gelegenheit noch in seinem Altei auf seinen Meistei, den Philoso-
phen Bientano beiief, hatte etwas Subalteines, wenigstens kam es mii so voi, da
ich mich noch kaummit Bientano befat und von dei Vielfalt seinei Austiahlung
eine unzuieichende Voistellung hatte (ibid., :,:, see also :,I).
8. Unpublished lettei of I,,: to the authoi. I iely in this chaptei on Ryan (and
latei Copleston) to sketch in the philosophical infoimation commensuiate with
Canettis own undeistanding as well as with the novels intention. It would be
digiessive and fundamentally mistaken, I think, to tuin to philosophical tiactates
we knowCanetti didnot iead, iathei thanattendto the level of discouise he cleaily
did imbibe at the univeisity, Viennese coee houses, and salons. My giatitude to
my philosophei colleague, Steven Giossman, foi ieading this chaptei foi accuiacy.
,. Ryan, Vanishing Subject, o::.
Io. Ryan fuithei delineates a thiid gioup of empiiical psychologists (ibid.,
:), but this distinction is not caiiied thiough in hei own analysis and neithei is it
of ielevance heie.
II. Ibid., ,.
I:. Ibid., Io. It is impoitant to iemembei that tuin of the centuiy is a notoii-
ously expandable teim, often extended up to the Second Woild Wai. This is the
sense in which Ryan uses it.
I_. Ibid., :.
I. See, foi example, ibid., I:, wheie Ryan notes that the two Austiian em-
piiicists weie] on opposite sides of one of the gieatest contioveisies of theii
time: the debate between holists and elementaiists (the lattei also being known
as atomists).
I,. Ibid., :I.
Io. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, :,:.
I,. This distinguishes Kafka, whose attitude towaid neoempiiicism Ryan
deems to be paiodic, fiomCanetti. Wheieas Kafka also held up Bientanos notion
of intentionality to paiodic ciitique (Ryan, Vanishing Subject, IooII:), he does
o1is 1o v.cis 8I 88 : ::_
not do so out of the same concein foi the social woild. An iionic tieatment of
empiiicism does not theiefoie necessaiily imply an unsympathetic tieatment of
the fiagmented self of high modeinism. See my discussion below in chaptei o.
I8. AF, :,_, Voi seinei Fiima blieb sie stehen. Die Buchstaben des Fiimen-
schilds iuckten nah an ihie Augen. Eist las sie Gio & Muttei, dann las sie Giob
& Fiau. Das hatte sie gein. Dafui gab sie ihie eilige Zeit auch hei . . . Da tanzten
die Buchstaben voi Fieude, und als dei Tanz zu Ende wai, las sie auf einmal Gio
& Fiau. Das pate ihi gai nicht (DB, :,,).
I,. Copleston, Histcry, ,:_I, my emphasis.
:o. Locke does so as well, Hume oeis a piagmatist solution (not unlike Wil-
liam Jamess) to the skepticism that aiises fiom his veision of empiiicist philoso-
phy, see ibid., ::o.
:I. Ibid., o::oo.
::. AF, I___, Sie suchte sich die giote Kiiche dei Stadt, den Domaus . . . Da
hing ein Bild mit demAbendmahl, in teuien Olfaiben gemalt . . . Den Beutel hatte
man gieifen konnen, dieiig schone Silbeistucke steckten diin . . . Dei Judas hielt
ihn gepackt. Dei hatt ihn nicht heigegeben, dei wai ja so geizig. Dei veigonnte
niemandem was. Dei wai wie ihi Mann . . . Ihi Mann ist magei, dei Judas ist dick
und hat einen ioten Bait. In dei Mitte von allen sitzt dei inteiessante Mensch.
So ein schones Gesicht hat ei, ganz bla, und die Augen genauso wie es sich ge-
hoit. Dei wei alles . . . Ihi Mann ist ein Schmutznk. Dei macht das fui zwanzig
Schilling . . . Sie ist die weie Taube. Die iegt ihmgiad ubei den Kopt. Die glanzt,
weil sie so unschuldig ist. Dei Malei hat es so wollen . . . Sie ist die weie Taube.
Da soll es dei Judas nui veisuchen. Ei kiiegt sie doch nicht zu fassen. Sie iegt
ja wohin sie will. Sie iegt zum inteiessanten Menschen, sie wei, was schon ist.
Dei Judas hat nichts zu sagen. Dei mu sich aufhangen . . . Das Geld gehoit ihi
. . . Gleich kommen die Soldaten . . . Sie wiid voitieten und sagen: Das ist nicht
dei Heiland. Das ist dei Heii Giob, einfachei Angestelltei bei dei Fiima Gio &
Muttei. Dem duifen Sie nichts tun. Ich bin die Fiau. . . Dei Judas soll sich schon
aufhangen. Sie ist die weie Taube (DB, Io, II:).
:_. I develop this point fuithei in Elias Canettis Die Blendung as a Viennese
Novel.
:. AF, :8, Das Bewutsein bewahie man fui wiikliche Gedanken, sie nahien
sich von ihm, sie biauchen es, ohne Bewutsein sind sie nicht denkbai (DB, :,).
:,. Beikeley, Principles cf Human Kncwledge, I:I,.
:o. Ibid., ,::__, my emphasis.
:,. Ryan, Vanishing Subject, I:.
:8. AF, _o,, tians. iev., Ei hatte Theiese gepackt, nicht mehi zaghaft, mit allei
Kiaft hielt ei sich an ihiemRock fest, ei stie sie weg, ei zeiite sie zu sich heian, ei
umspannte sie mit seinenlangen, hageienAimen. Sie liees sichgefallen . . . Bevoi
sie aufgehangt weiden, bekommen Moidei eine letzte Mahlzeit . . . Ei diehte sie
einmal umihie eigene Achse und veizichtete auf die Umaimung . . . Ei glotzte sie
aus zwei Zentimetei Entfeinung an. Ei stiich mit zehn Fingein am Rock entlang.
:: : o1is 1o v.cis 88,_
Ei stieckte die Zunge heiaus und schnuppeite mit dei Nase. Die Tianen tiaten
ihm in die Augen, voi Anstiengung. Ich leide an diesei Halluzination! bekannte
ei keuchend (DB, __).
:,. AF, _o,, Ich lebe fui die Wahiheit. Ich wei, diese Wahiheit lugt (DB, ___,
emphasis in oiiginal).
_o. AF, _o,.
_I. AF, ::, Alle Moide, alle Angste, alle Tucken dei Welt waien zeistoben.
Dei Hausbesoigei geel ihm. Sein Kopf eiinneite ihn an die aufgehende Sonne
heute fiuh. Ei wai giob, abei eifiischend, ein unbandig staikei Keil, wie man sie
in Kultuistadten und -hausein selten mehi sieht. Die Tieppe diohnte. Statt sie zu
tiagen, schlug Atlas die aime Eide (DB, o:).
_:. In the context of the inteiwai peiiod it is peihaps not incidental to note
that Geoigs ieinsciiption of Pfa is piedicated on an enthusiasm foi natuie and
mythology (Pfa becomes Atlas), both of which aie opposed to Kultuistadte.
The natuie inteiest and anti-uiban sentiment iemind us that Geoig, as the gieat
piomotei of the Natuimensch (goiilla man) ovei against the decadent boui-
geois citizen, can be situated among the contempoianeous Lebensphilosophie
enthusiasts without compiomising his neoempiiicist auia.
__. AF, _,o,,, Sie ist nicht seine Tochtei! . . . Iiitumlich eiwahnte ei ein-
mal eine gewisse Poli. Seine Muskeln machten den Fehlei sofoit wiedei gut. Dei
Name dei Weibspeison, die ei zuchtigte, lautete auf Anna. Sie behauptete mit
einei Tochtei von ihm identisch zu sein. Ei schenkte ihi keinen Glauben. Die
Haaie elen ihi aus, und da sie sich wehite, zeibiachen zwei Fingei (DB, III:).
_. Petei Russell aigues, If we aie honest, we see Autc-da-Fe foi what it is: a
violently limited, eccentiic and sadistic viewof human existence, in The Vision
of Man, _:.
_,. AF, ,I, Esse percipi, sein ist wahigenommen weiden. Was ich nicht wahi-
nehme, existieit nicht! (DB, ,_).
_o. AF, o_, Geoiges wai Gelehitei genug, um eine Abhandlung ubei die
Spiache dieses Iiien zu veioentlichen. Auf die Psychologie dei Laute el neues
Licht (DB, I).
_,. AF, o,o, Sie sehen, meine Heiien, sagte ei ihnen etwa, wenn ei allein
mit ihnen wai, was fui aimselige Einfaltspinsel, was fui tiauiige und veistockte
Buigei wii sind, gegen diesen genialen Paianoikei gehalten. Wii sitzen, ei ist
besessen, auf den Eifahiungen andiei wii, von eigenen ei. Ei tieibt mutteiseele-
nallein, wie die Eide, duich seinen Weltiaum . . . Ei glaubt an das, was ihm
seine Sinne voitauschen. Wii mitiauen unseien gesunden Sinnen . . . Und ei:
Ei ist Allah, Piophet und Moslim in einei Peison. Bleibt ein Wundei daium kein
Wundei mehi, weil wii ihm die Etikette Paianoia chionica aufkleben: Wii sitzen
auf unseiem dicken Veistand wie Habgeiei auf ihiem Geld. Dei Veistand, wie wii
ihn veistehen, ist ein Miveistandnis. Wenn es ein Leben ieinei Geistigkeit gibt,
so fuhit es diesei Veiiuckte! (DB, ).
_8. AF, Io, Wenn ei mude wai und von dei Hochspannung, mit dei ihn seine
o1is 1o v.cis ,,8 : ::,
iiien Fieunde luden, ausiuhen wollte, veisenkte ei sich in die Seele iigendeines
Assistenten. Alles was Geoiges tat, spielte in fiemden Menschen (DB, ,). Fui-
thei, Geoig thinks of himself in quintessentially empiiicist teims, namely, as a
walking wax tablet, an image that expiesses the inteipenetiability so cential to
the empiiicist model of consciousness. As a tablet it is an image of a considei-
ably moie passive self, yet as a wax tablet, it suggets a modicum of mutual
inteiaction, of enteiing as well as ieceiving the stimulus. But as with so many
othei self-nominated images in the novel, we will see that this does not ieally t
what we know about Geoig and his activities. It is a claim that, like so much of
the naiiation in Autc-da-Fe, will have to be ievised ietiospectively.
_,. Copleston, Histcry, ,:o.
o. Foi Foucault, the tension between the empiiical and the tianscendental
(Man and His Doubles, _:o) conceptions of the human being constitutes the
dilemma pai excellence of modein philosophy, as Gutting (in Michel Foucault,
chaptei , of French Philcscphy in the :oth Century) iemaiks: The question of
man is paiticulaily dicult because man is supposed to be simultaneously the
souice of iepiesentations (a subject) and an object of iepiesentation. Because of
this, the question of how iepiesentation is possible becomes the question of how
theie can be a being that is both the ultimate subject of iepiesentation and a iepie-
sented object. Developing a coheient conception of man in this sense has been
the fundamental pioject of philosophy within the modein episteme (i.e., philoso-
phy since Kant). I cite this passage fiomthe manusciipt of Guttings foithcoming
study, geneiously piovided to me by the authoi.
I. One needs to iead the passage on Geoigs conveision caiefully, foi it is
focalized by him. He caiiies on an aaii with the bankeis wife, he admits, despite
his intention to iefoim. To the veiy end, in fact, he attempts to solve pioblems
eiotically. Attempting to get Theiese to agiee to his conditions, Geoig says, Wenn
ich nicht veiheiiatet waie! . . . Sie haben doch, was eine Fiau biaucht. Nichts fehlt.
Glauben Sie mii! . . . Und die Augen! Und die Jugend! Und dei kleine Mund! Wie
gesagt, wenn ich nicht veiheiiatet waieich wuide Sie zui Sunde veifuhien (DB,
,o,,).
:. Canetti, Das eiste Buch, :,I,:.
_. Foi example, Dissingei aigues (iathei too cieatively, I think) that the name
Kant is a hidden contiaction foi Canetti, and that both Kant and Kien
aie coveit iefeiences (via the Latin canis and the Fiench chien, iespectively) to the
woid dog. Dissingei undeitakes these philological aciobatics in oidei to show
that the biotheis Kien iepiesent the poet, about whom Canetti once said, Dei
echte Dichtei ist dei Hund seinei Zeit, (Vereinzelung und Massenwahn, I:,).
. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, .
,. Copleston, Histcry, :,.
o. AF, I8, Wo immei eine Lehikanzel fui ostliche Philologie fiei wuide, tiug
man sie zu alleieist ihm an. Ei lehnte mit veiachtlichei Hoichkeit ab (DB, Io).
,. Copleston, Histcry, o:I8I8_.
::o : o1is 1o v.cis ,8I oI
8. All of this functions in the same mannei as having Kien quote Beikeley
iiiesponsibly, in ignoiance of, oi indieience to, the laigei system of ideas (as
Daiby would have it). The ieadei, ieasonably well infoimed on the Westein philo-
sophical and cultuial tiadition, peiceives Kiens fiaudulence without iecasting the
naiiatoi in the image of Beikeleys God.
,. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, .
,o. Neukantianismus bezeichnet eine philosophische Schuliichtung . . . die
um die Jahihundeitwende zui tonangebenden Philosophie in Deutschland avan-
cieite und deien Ende gemeinhin mit dem Beginn des Zweiten Weltkiiegs ange-
setzt wiid (Ollig, Der Neukantianismus, I).
,I. The leading guies in this dispaiate movement weie Heimann Cohen,
Wilhelm Windelband, Wilhelm Dilthey, and Einst Cassiiei, whose inuential
Philcscphie der symbclischen Fcrmen (I,:_:,) peihaps best epitomizes the neo-
Kantian eoit to ieinvigoiate the humanities as a philosophically cogent entei-
piise. Canettis own contiibution to this debate is only paitially evident in Autc-
da-Fe. A new, moie positive sense of cultuie emeiges ist in Crcwds and Pcwer,
see below, chaptei ,.
,:. AF, I:_, my emphasis, Stimmt! sagte ei leise und nickte, wie immei wenn
eine Wiiklichkeit ihiem Uibild im Diuck entspiach (DB, I:,).
,_. AF, :o, Ei nahmdie Rosen aus Fischeiles Hand, entsann sich ihies Wohl-
geiuches, den ei aus peisischen Liebesgedichten kannte, und naheite sie seinen
Augen, iichtig, sie iochen. Das besanftigte ihn vollends (DB, :o,).
,. AF, o,, tians. iev., Die Obeifenstei lieen Luft und Gedanken ein . . .
Duichs Glas dei Fenstei spuite man den allgemeinen Zustand des Himmels,
gedampftei und stillei, als ei inWiiklichkeit wai. Ein mattes Blau sagte: die Sonne
scheint, abei nicht bis zu mii. Ein ebenso mattes Giau, es wiid iegnen, abei nicht
auf mich. Ein zaites Geiausch veiiiet fallende Tiopfen. Ganz von feine nahmman
sie auf, sie beiuhiten einen nicht. Man wute nui: die Sonne stiahlt, Wolken
gehen, Regen fallt. Es wai, als hatte sich jemand gegen die Eide veibaiiikadieit,
gegen alles blo mateiielle Beziehungswesen, gegen alles nui Planetaiische eine
Kabine eibaut, eine ungeheuie Kabine, so gio, da sie fui das Wenige ausieichte,
welches an dei Eide mehi als Eide und mehi als Staub ist, zu dem das Leben
wiedei zeifallt (DB, o8o,). Kiens conception of the scholaily life as essentially
insulaidesigned to keep the unknown at bayis conveyed succinctly in the
following line that continues the passage cited above: Auf dei Fahit duich das
Unbekannte wai man wie auf keinei Fahit (DB, o,).
,,. AF, I,Io, Punkt acht begann die Aibeit, sein Dienst an dei Wahiheit . . .
Man naheite sich dei Wahiheit, indem man sich von den Menschen abschlo.
Dei Alltag wai ein obeiachliches Gewiii von Lugen . . . Wei untei den schlechten
Schauspielein, aus denen die Masse bestand, hatte ein Gesicht, das ihn fesselte:
Sie veiandeiten es nach dem Augenblick . . . Er legte seinen Ehigeiz in eine
Haitnackigkeit des Wesens. Nicht blo einen Monat, nicht ein Jahi, sein ganzes
Leben blieb ei sich gleich (DB, I_I).
o1is 1o v.cis I oI , : ::,
,o. AF, Io, Dei Chaiaktei, wenn man einen hatte, bestimmte auch die Gestalt,
schmal, stieng und knochig (DB, I).
,,. AF, :I, Sie wunschen! [ Ichich wollte in die Bucheiabteilung. [ Die
bin ich. . . . [ Was hatten Sie oben voi: fiagte Kien diohend. Ach, nui den
Schillei (DB, :__).
,8. AF, :I,, Tun Sie das nie wiedei, mein Fieund! Kein Mensch ist soviel weit
wie seine Buchei, glauben Sie mii! . . . Waium geiade Schillei: Lesen Sie doch
das Oiiginal! Lesen Sie Immanuel Kant! (DB, :_, emphasis in oiiginal).
,,. AF, , Es aigeit ihn, da ei nui an den kategoiischen Impeiativ und
nicht an Gott glaubt. Sonst schobe ei diesem die Schuld zu (DB, 8,).
oo. AF, ,,, tians. iev., Jedei Mensch biaucht eine Heimat, nicht eine, wie
piimitive Faustpatiioten sie veistehen, auch keine Religion, matten Voige-
schmack einei Heimat imJenseits, nein, eine Heimat, die Boden, Aibeit, Fieunde,
Eiholung und geistigen Fassungsiaum zu einem natuilichen, wohlgeoidneten
Ganzen, zu einem eigenen Kosmos zusammenschliet. Die beste Denition dei
Heimat ist Bibliothek. Fiauen halt man am klugsten von seinei Heimat fein.
Entschliet man sich doch, eine aufzunehmen, so tiachte man, sie dei Heimat
eist vollig zu assimilieien, so wie ei es getan hat (DB, ,,, compaie also I8).
oI. See Ringei, The Decline cf the German Mandarins, :,_,.
o:. AF, I,8,,, An allen Schmeizen ist die Gegenwait schuld. Ei sehnt sich
nach dei Zukunft, weil dann mehi Veigangenheit auf dei Welt sein wiid. Die Vei-
gangenheit ist gut, sie tut niemand was zuleid, zwanzig Jahie hat ei sich fiei in ihi
bewegt, ei wai glucklich. Wei fuhlt sich in dei Gegenwait glucklich: Ja, wenn wii
keine Sinne hatten, da waie auch eine Gegenwait eitiaglich . . . Ei beugt sich voi
dem Piimat dei Veigangenheit . . . Eine Zeit wiid kommen, da die Menschen ihie
Sinne zu Eiinneiung und alle Zeit zu Veigangenheit umschmieden weiden. Eine
Zeit wiid kommen, da eine einzige Veigangenheit alle Menschen umspannt, da
nichts ist auei dei Veigangenheit, da jedei glaubt: an die Veigangenheit (DB,
Io,).
o_. AF, I,,, Gott ist die Veigangenheit. Ei glaubt an Gott (DB, Io,, emphasis
in oiiginal).
o. Nicholas Boyle explicates the biith of Geiman idealism within a cultuie
of ex-theologians who tiansfei ieligious categoiies to philosophy and above all
to ait (Kunst), a quite questionable phenomenon, he aigues, that continues
down to oui own day. See his Leaining fiom Geimany.
o,. Ollig iemaiks in this iegaid that neo-Kantianismiichtete sich gegen einen
natuiwissenschaftlich veibiamten Objektivismus, dei die Subjektkomponente im
Eikenntnisvoigang mehi odei wenigei ganzlich untei den Tisch fallen lassen
wollte (Der Neukantianismus, I:).
oo. Ibid., :.
o,. Tolpel hantieien mit Elektiizitat und komplizieiten Atomen . . . Diese
bediuckte Seite, so klai und gegliedeit wie nui iigendeine, ist in Wiiklichkeit
ein hollischei Haufe iasendei Elektionen. Waie ei sich dessen immei bewut, so
::8 : o1is 1o v.cis I ooI o
muten die Buchstaben voi seinen Augen tanzen . . . Am Tage biachte ei eine
schwache Zeile hintei sich, mehi nicht. Es ist sein Recht, die Blindheit, die ihn
voi solchen Sinnesexzessen schutzt, auf alle stoienden Elemente in seinem Leben
zu ubeitiagen (DB, ,_).
cu.v1iv
I. Aus dem Piatei ist natuilich auch die ungeheueiliche Figuidei Siegfiied
Fischeile in dei Blendungheivoigegangen, nicht: Also, dei schiecklich zum
Scheitein veiuiteilte Veisuch einei Assimilation untei extiemen Bedingungen:
Geiald Stieg in Ein Dichter gegen Macht und Tcd.
:. AF, I88,, Von den Sitten dei Lokalitat veistand ei Kien] wenig, abei eins
schien ihm gewi: hiei stiebte ein ieinei Geist in elendem Koipei seit zwanzig
Jahien danach, sich ubei den Schmutz seinei Umgebung zu eiheben . . . Theiese
i.e., die Pensionistin] zog ihn ebenso behaiilich in den Schmutz zuiuck . . . Von
dei Welt des Geistes hat ei nun einen winzigen Zipfel gefat und klammeit sich
daian mit dei Kiaft eines Eitiinkenden. Das Schachspiel ist seine Bibliothek . . .
Kien stellt sich die Kampfe voi, die diesei vom Leben geschlagene Mensch um
seine Wohnung fuhit. Ei biingt ein Buch mit nach Hause, um heimlich daiin zu
lesen, sie zeiieit es, da die Fetzen iegen. Sie zwingt ihn, ihi seine Wohnung
fui ihie entsetzlichen Zwecke zui Veifugung zu stellen. Vielleicht bezahlt sie eine
Bedieneiin, eine Spionin, um die Wohnung bucheiiein zu halten, wenn sie nicht
zu Hause ist. Buchei sind veiboten, ihi Lebenswandel ist eilaubt . . . Sie ieit die
Tui auf und stot mit ihien plumpen Fuen das Schachbiett um. Heii Fischeile
heult wie ein kleines Kind. Ei befand sich geiade an dei inteiessantesten Stelle
seines Buches. Ei sammelt die heiumliegenden Buchstaben und wendet das Ge-
sicht ab, damit sie sich ubei seine Tianen nicht fieut. Ei ist ein kleinei Held. Ei
hat Chaiaktei (DB, :oI).
_. Two studies aie of paiticulai inteiest heie: Ringeis The Decline cf the Ger-
man Mandarins and Maichands Dcwn frcm Olympus.
. Maichand, Dcwn frcm Olympus, _:I.
,. Ibid., _I:I.
o. DB, :o,, :Io.
,. Maichand, Dcwn frcm Olympus, _Io.
8. Ibid., _::.
,. Ibid., _:8. Maichand emphasizes the quietist chaiactei of this new human-
ism, a fact that stiongly encouiages the connection with Canettis novel: Thus the
gieatest failing of this devoutly antimodein pedagogy was its inability to confiont
nationalist and iacialist classical studies with a ciedible, embiacive cultuial his-
toiy . . . Jagei and his followeis simply allowed themselves to become stiawmen
oi uncompiehending inteinal migis like Thomas Manns Seienus Zeitblom
undei the ieign of the antihumanist advocates of Aiyan supiemacy (ibid., __o).
o1is 1o v.cis I I I I : ::,
Io. AF, I,:, tians. iev., Ubeihaupt fuichtete ei mit dem Bildungshungei des
Kleinen in Konikt zu geiaten. Dei wuide ihm mit einem Anschein von Recht
voiweifen, da da Buchei biachlagen. Wie sollte ei sich veiteidigen: (DB, :o,).
II. AF, I,, Duich den taglichen Umgang mit solchen Mengen von Bildung
wuide dei Hungei des Kleinen danach gioei und gioei, plotzlich wuide man
ihn dabei eitappen, wie ei sich an ein Buch heianmachte und es zu lesen veisuchte
. . . Man mute ihn mundlich voibeieiten (DB, :II).
I:. AF, I,, Wenn es einem gelang, diesen gleichgesinnten Natuien] ein
Stuck Bildung, einStuck Menschentumzu schenken, so hatte manetwas geleistet
(DB, :II). When Kien discoveis that books aie ielegated to the top ooi of the
Theiesianum, the least secuie place in case of ie, he imagines his own behavioi
in the event of such a ie. Like a loving motheihe imagineshe stands befoie
the dilemma of whethei to abandon his childien (i.e., books) to theii ceitain
death, oi iisk maiming them(oi woise) by his iescue eoits. He opts foi the lattei:
Ei biingt es sie ins Feuei zu weifen] nicht ubeis Heiz, unter ihnen ist er zum
Menschen gewcrden (DB, ::,, my emphasis).
I_. AF, :,o, Untei dem Diuck dei Buchei, die ei nicht einmal las, veiandeite
sich dei Zweig zusehends. Kiens alte Theoiie bestatigte sich glanzend (DB, :,_).
I. Bellei, Vienna and the }ews, :II. Assimilation was also Kiauss answei to
Heizls call to Zionism, see Bellei, I_.
I,. Ibid., :II.
Io. Bellei notes that Cohen could pioclaim that Kant was the philosophei of
the Jews, that Jews had become the caiiieis of the idealistic mission because not
of this woild (ibid., Io). This bioadei, self-conscious Jewish investment in the
Enlightenment that acknowledged essential connections to Judaism Bellei teims
the continuation of Judaism by othei means beyond the Jewish identity (ibid.,
I_). See also Nathan Rotenstieich, Heimann Cohen.
I,. Bellei, Vienna and the }ews, I_8.
I8. Ibid., I:,.
I,. AF, I,,, tians. iev.: machtige Nase is bettei iendeied as immense nose
iathei than Wedgwoods majestic nose. Da tauchte ein ungeheuiei Buckel
neben ihm Kien] auf und fiagte, ob es gestattet sei. Kien blickte angestiengt
hinuntei. Wowai dei Mund, aus demes spiach: Und schon hupfte dei Besitzei des
Buckels, ein Zweig, an einem Stuhl in die Hohe . . . Die Spitze dei staik geboge-
nen Nase lag in dei Tiefe des Kinns. Dei Mund wai so klein wie dei Mann, nui
ei wai nicht zu nden. Keine Stiin, keine Ohien, kein Hals, kein Rumpfdiesei
Mensch bestand aus einem Buckel, einei machtigen Nase und zwei schwaizen,
iuhigen, tiauiigen Augen . . . Plotzlich hoite Kien] eine heiseie Stimme unteim
Tisch fiagen: Wie gehn die Geschafte: (DB, I8,,o).
:o. Paal, Figurenkcnstellaticn, _I.
:I. AF, I,,, Kien musteite die ausschlieliche Nase des Kleinen, sie ote ihm
Veidacht ein (DB, I,o).
::. AF, I8o, Fischeile machte eine ganz kleine Pause, um die Wiikung des
:_o : o1is 1o v.cis I I I ,
Woites judisch auf seinVisavis zu beobachten. Kann man wissen: Die Welt wim-
melt von Antisemiten. Ein Jude ist immei auf dei Hut voi Todfeinden. Bucklige
Zweige und gai solche, die es tiotzdemzumZuhaltei gebiacht haben, sind schaife
Beobachtei. Das Schlucken des andeien entging ihm nicht. Ei deutete es als Vei-
legenheit und hielt von diesem Augenblick an Kien, dei nichts wenigei wai, fui
einen Juden (DB, I,o).
:_. AF, :_, tians. iev., Ei veiga, da ei in einei Kiiche wai. Voi Kiichen
hatte ei sonst Respekt und Scheu, weil seine Nase sehi auallig wai (DB, :,o).
:. AF, :,, tians. iev., Fischeile wai ubeiiumpelt, in einei Kiiche fuhlte
ei sich unsichei. Beinahe hatte ei Kien wiedei auf den Platz hinausgeschleift
. . . Soll die Kiiche einstuizen, dei Polizei lauft ei nicht in die Aime! Fischeile
kannte schieckliche Geschichten von Juden, die untei den Tiummein kiachendei
Kiichen begiaben wuiden, weil sie nicht hineingehoiten. Seine Fiau, die Pen-
sionistin, hatte sie ihm eizahlt, weil sie fiomm wai und ihn zu ihiem Glauben
bekehien wollte (DB, :o8).
:,. DB, I,o, :oo.
:o. These bestial attiibutes of Fischeile can be found, iespectively, at DB, I,o,
_I,, _,o, and _Io.
:,. AF, :,o, tians. iev., Also undankbai sind Sie auch! Sie Saujud! . . . Von
einem Saujuden hat man nichts andeies zu eiwaiten (DB, :,_).
:8. AF, _,:, tians. iev.: Wedgwood oeis Go boil youi head! foi Gehen Sie
betteln mit Ihiei Nase! which fails to captuie the anti-Semitic imageiy of the
oiiginal: Bei uns in Euiopa nennt man das Fieschach! Gehen Sie betteln mit
Ihiei Nase! (DB, _8). Since the woid Judennase is so often on Fischeiles lips,
one might even go so fai as to iead: Go begging oi, get lost] with that Jewnose!
:,. Jutta Paal aigues just this: Vielmehi scheint es, da Canetti die anti-
semitischen Tendenzen seinei Zeit kaum bemeikt hat, wenn ei im Augenspiel
eiwahnt, da ei spatei, mit dem Foitgang dei Eieignisse, ubei Fischeile oft Un-
behagen empfand und sich fui diese Figui zu iechtfeitigen suchte (Figuren-
kcnstellaticn, _I n. Io). Paals suggestion that the autobiogiaphy ietiacts this
aspect of the novel is simply mistaken, the passage she cites suppoits no such
asseition. It is at any iate astonishing to suggest that Canetti was oblivious to
anti-Semitism, foi he iecoids in his autobiogiaphy hoiioi at the assassination of
Waltei Rathenau, a sympathy foi the situation of Austiian Galician Jews dui-
ing the time of the Fiist Woild Wai, and this ieminiscence about Alma Mahleis
anti-Jewish bigotiy: Did you evei see Giopius:Canetti iecalls being asked
A handsome, tall man. Exactly what one calls Aiyan. The only man who suited
me iacially. Otheiwise, it was always shoit Jews, like Mahlei, who kept falling
in love with me (Das Augenspiel, ,o). On the situation of the Galician Jews, see
Das Augenspiel, I:,, additional iemaiks about Alma Mahleis anti-Semitism and
piejudice can be found theie at ,8, I,,.
_o. We know that Canetti ieected on Jewish self-hatied at the time he wiote
this novel, because he iepoits in his autobiogiaphy that Otto Weiningeis Ge-
o1is 1o v.ci I I , : :_I
schlecht und Character enjoyed a iemaikable populaiity among his peeis at this
junctuie. Moie to the point, Canetti iecoided in his diaiiessome of which latei
became the Aufzeichnungenjust ten yeais aftei the ist publication of the novel
a ieection on self-hatied (Selbstha). Yet as the following Aufzeichnungen
passage makes cleai, this is not a case of confessing some shameful peisonal chai-
actei aw, noi is this obseivation necessaiily limited in iefeience to Jews: Es ist
nui gut, sich manchmal zu hassen, nicht zu oft, sonst biaucht man wiedei sehi
viel Ha gegen andeie, um den Selbstha auszugleichen (Die Prcvinz des Men-
schen, 8,).
_I. Nicola Riedneis Canettis Fischerle helpfully catalogues the full aiiay of
anti-Semitic steieotypes encoded in Fischeile in a moie systematic mannei than
it is my puipose to do heie. While Riednei coiiectly diaws oui attention to the
key issue of assimilation, she ends up blaming the victim: Fischeile is piesented
as a negative example of ovei-assimilation, that is, as someone who has aban-
doned die Quellen dei eigenen Heikunft (Canettis Fischerle, I_). This ieading
iests on a questionable viewof Fischeile as someone who has a psyche capable of
foigetting his identity, a disputable use of Canettis autobiogiaphy, as well as an
unsuppoited impoitation of key ideas fiom Masse und Macht.
_:. Gilman, The }ews Bcdy, _.
__. The depiction of Fischeile is indebted to a whole tiadition of anti-Semitic
caiicatuie. Fischeiles most notoiious cultuial foiebeai with iegaid to physical
iesemblance is peihaps Wilhelm Buschs Schmulchen Schiefelbeinei (I88:), in
Petei Gays woids, the populai poets most obvious and most distasteful Jew.
Gay notes fuithei: In seveial poems, Busch speaks of the Jew, with his ciooked
nose and devious ways, physically ugly, moially coiiupt, and nancially unsciu-
pulous. And he illustiates ihymes like these with savage diawings (Freud, }ews
and Other Germans, :o,8). We may theiefoie assume that Fischeile would easily
have been iecognized foi his anti-Semitic pedigiee by contempoiaiy ieadeis.
_. Astiiking example can be found in the caiicatuie of the Jewish ait ciitic foi
the Neue Freie Presse, which was intended to exhibit, Gilman notes, the essen-
tial image of the Jews body (Gilman, The }ews Bcdy, ,). Fuithei, Kail Ainolds
caiicatuie of the Beilin Jewish quaitei, Grenadierstrae, Berlin depicts viitually
eveiy Jewas sueiing fiom cuivatuie of the spine (ist piinted in Simplicissimus,
I,:I, iepiinted in Ruth Gay, }ews cf Germany, :_,).
_,. Some ieadeis will be ieminded of Waltei Benjamins bucklicht Mannlein,
which Hannah Aiendt emphasizes in hei intioduction to the English edition of
Illuminaticns, ,,. In a geneial way, the association may be justied: the dwaif
hunchback famous fiom Des Knaben Vunderhcrn was an omen of bad luck and
failuie, and as such played into latei anti-Semitic naiiative and caiicatuie. But
Benjamin does not himself make this association. Noi is it possible that Canetti
became awaie of the little hunchback via Benjamin, because Berliner Kindheit um
Neunzehnhundert, in which the iefeience appeais, was not wiitten until the late
thiities and published only posthumously, in I,,o.
:_: : o1is 1o v.cis I I ,I ,
_o. AF, I8o, my emphasis, tians. iev. Wedgwood softens the Geiman and
theieby obscuies the ieading I suggest below. By iendeiing tiauiig as mis-
taken, she implies that Kien, who focalizes this passage, somehow iegiets Fisch-
eiles physical handicap, wheieas the Geiman suggests just the opposite, namely
that Kien justies Fischeiles physical misfoitune in this mannei: ihi zeistoiendes
Tieiben . . . galt dem Manne gegenubei, den die Natui duich eine tiauiige Ety-
mologie ohnehin schon zum Kiuppel geschlagen hatte (DB, :o:).
_,. Fischeiles etymology, which he iepeats, is this: Passen Sie gut auf: Sti-
pendium ist ein feines Woit. Dieses Woit stammt aus dem Fianzosischen und
heit dasselbe wie das judische Kapital! (I,o).
_8. AF, I8o, An ihiei Etymologie sollt ihi sie eikennen (DB, I,o).
_,. AF, __, tians. iev. Wedgwood has dainty little nose foi the Geiman put-
zige Nase, a tianslation that excludes all valances of the woid that connote odd,
funny, cuiious, queei, etc.which, aftei all, aie the piincipal meanings of the
woid. Queei little nose captuies bettei the innkeepeis philosemitic conde-
scension evident in the following hypeibole and use of diminutives: Die Wiitin
schlo] Fischeiles Buckel in ihie Aime. Sie ubeischuttete ihn mit Kosewoiten, sie
hatte sich nach ihm gesehnt, nach seinei putzigen Nase, seinen kiummen Bein-
chen und dei lieben, lieben Schachkunst (DB, _,,).
o. Gilman, The }ews Bcdy, _8,,.
I. Pfa and Theiese aie in the piocess of pawning Kiens libiaiy at the Theresi-
anum. Pfa tosses heavy books at Theiese and seems to have second thoughts:
Ei wai auch damit unzufiieden, kam sich wie ein Schwachling voi und sagte
manchmal, nachstens wiid ei noch ein Jud (DB, _I:).
:. Gilman, The }ews Bcdy, ,Ioo.
_. In a ieection fiom I,:, Canetti indicated his opposition to the aiti-
ciality and pietense of chaiacteis that aie to be taken foi ieal people. Though he
is heie iefeiiing specically to diama, we might iecall that he elsewheie suggests
that all his woik is essentially diamatic: Dei Hauptwideistand, den ich gegen
die Entwicklung von Chaiakteien empfand (so als waien sie wiikliche, lebende
Menchen), eiinneit daian, da auch in dei Musik die Instiumente gegeben sind
(Die Prcvinz des Menschen, I,Io).
. Riednei veeis towaidattiibuting gieatei psychological dimensiontoFisch-
eile, claiming (impiobably, I think) that he possesses moie depth than Geoig
(Canettis Fischerle, ,). The assumption of psychological iealism of some degiee
infoims Riedneis conclusion, which piesumes Fischeile to possess the capacity to
choose one foimof assimilation ovei anothei, as well as the ability to tiansfoim
himself along the lines Canetti hinted at in Masse und Macht with his concept of
Veiwandlung.
,. Gilman, The }ews Bcdy, _, ,:, Petei Gay, Freud, }ews and Other Germans,
:Io.
o. In his masteiful study Der Name als Stigma, Beiing elucidates the cul-
tuial and histoiical dimensions to the name Siegfiied: Wie geimanisch dei
o1is 1o v.cis I I ,: : :__
Name anmutete, so gut schien ei spatei auch fui Juden dienlich, die sich mit allei
Macht geimanisieien wollten. Ei wuide dahei sehi bald antisemitisch maikieit,
Veisatzstuck in judischen Witzen und ubeihaupt Beweisstuck, da die Juden die
deutschen Namen ganz veidoiben hatten (Der Name als Stigma, :,:o n. I_o,
see also I8, ,,, :).
,. Ruth Gay, The }ews cf Germany, I8. Regaiding the Nibelungenlied as meta-
phoi foi Jewish assimilation to Geiman cultuie, Petei Gay wiites: When Hei-
mann] Levi the Jewish self-hating conductoi of Wagneis Parsifal ] lay ill, his
fathei came to visit him, and . . . tiied to iead the Nibelungenlied, and asked his
son questions. A substantial poition of Geiman-Jewish histoiy is summed up in
this little domestic scene (Freud, }ews and Other Germans, :I8 n. ,_).
8. See Panizza, The Operated }ew. Fiom his tell-tale Jewish physical at-
tiibutes, to his desiie to unleain his Geiman-Jewish dialect, to his appetite foi
that seal of successful assimilation, the title of Doctoi, Panizzas Itzig miiiois
the desciiption (and fate) of Canettis Fischeile.
,. Zipes, Operated }ew, 88.
,o. Woild Wai I was the tuining point in Jewish assimilation to Geiman cul-
tuie. On this point Petei Gay wiites: The decline of Geiman libeialism and,
even woise, the expeiience of wai and its tempestuous afteimath went fai towaid
closing the avenues of Jewish appioaches to host cultuies. The old feai ietuined,
but undei newconditions and hence undei incompiehensible guises. The long as-
cent of Jewish integiation into Geiman cultuie was, if not exactly ovei, ceitainly
impeiiled (Freud, }ews and Other Germans, :oo).
,I. Ibid., I,,.
,:. On the populaiity of Wagnei in the pieWoild Wai II eia, paiticulaily
among Jews, see Bellei, Vienna and the }ews, I,,,,.
,_. Hanisch, The Political Inuence, I,o.
,. Ibid., I,,.
,,. In Rohl, Wilhelm II, o.
,o. Thomas Mann ceitainly took Wagnei foi gianted as the cultuial point of
iefeience foi a numbei of his woiks fiom the ist pait of the centuiy. The best
known of these, Das Blut dei Walsungen (ist published I,:I), featuies Jewish
twins named foi Siegfiieds paients (Sigismund and Sieglinde), who, in the stoiys
penultimate episode, attendWagneis DieValkure, the opeia inDer Ring des Nibe-
lungen that diiectly piecedes Siegfried. The novella makes unmistakable use of
anti-Semitic clichs, which has eained it the status of one of Manns Skandal-
geschichten (Vaget). Essentially this stoiy depicts two Jewish siblings ieading
themselves longingly into a Geiman cultuial classic. Iionically, both the Aiyan-
looking paients of Siegfiied (in the opeia) and Manns pointedly Jewish specta-
tois see themselves as outsideis, a naiiative piocess that would seemto question
the veiy Geiman-Jewish dichotomy upon which the stoiy depends. See Vaget,
Walsungenblut, and Reed, Dei Fall Wagnei.
,,. The muideious passion is moie ieadily evident in the oiiginal Geiman:
:_ : o1is 1o v.cis I ::,
Seh ich dii eist [ mit den Augen zu, [ zu ubel eikenn ich [ was alles du thust: [
seh ich dich stehn, [ gangeln und gehn, [ knicken und nicken, [ mit den Augen
zwicken: [ beim Genick mocht ich [ den Nickei packen, [ den Gaiaus geben [
dem gaistgen Zwickei! [ . . . [ Alle Thieie sind [ mii theuiei als du: [ Baum und
Vogel, [ die Fische im Bach, [ liebei mag ich sie [ leiden als dich (Act I, scene I,
I,,). Wagnei iefeiences aie to the Noiton ciitical edition, with English and Gei-
man paiallel text, accoidingly, page numbeis aie identical foi both languages.
,8. Da sah ich denn auch [ mein eigen Bild, [ ganz andeis als du [ dunkt ich
mii da: [ so glich wohl dei Kiote [ ein glanzendei Fisch, [ doch kioch nie ein Fisch
aus dei Kiote! (ibid., I8I).
,,. Again, the Geiman is somewhat stiongei in tone: Ganz fiemd bist du mii
(ibid., I8:).
oo. So, hie mich die Muttei, [ mocht ich dich heien: [ als Siegfiied wuid-
est [ du staik und schon (ibid., I8_).
oI. Weinei, Richard Vagner, I,o. Weinei maintains fuithei: Siegfiieds voice,
like Waltheis in Die Meistersinger, is the voice of the Vclk, whose deepei iegis-
teis connote foi Wagnei the Geiman essence. Mimes highei instiument, on the
othei hand, anticipates the voice of that most anti-Semitic and deiisive of musical-
diamatic constiuctions, Sixtus Beckmessei also of Die Meistersinger (Io8).
o:. See Boichmeyei, The Question of Anti-Semitism. Boichmeyei is excel-
lent on the issue of anti-Semitism in Wagneis own life. His analysis of the lyiical
texts, howevei, is somewhat limited by textimmanent assumptions.
o_. Aus dem Wege dich zu iaumen, [ daif ich doch nicht iasten: [ Wie kam
ich sonst andeis zui Beute (Act :, scene _, :_8).
o. Tians. iev. Schmeck dumeinSchweit, [ ekligei Schwatzei!, intianslating
the stage diiections, I have followed the Geiman Pipei edition (:_:__), accoid-
ing to which Siegfiied packt Mimes Leichnam auf, schleppt ihn nach dei Hohle
und wiift ihn doit hinein.
o,. In dei Hohle hiei [ lieg auf demHoit! [ Mit zahei List [ eizieltest du ihn: [
jetzt magst du des wonnigen walten! (Act :, scene _, :_8).
oo. On the conict between assimilated Westein Jews and oithodox Eastein
Jews, see Bellei, Vienna and the }ews, I__, on tensions between Zionists and (othei)
Austiian Jews, consult Mosei, Die Katastiophe dei Juden in Osteiieich, ,,.
o,. The call to iescind Jewish assimilation to Geiman cultuie can be tiaced to
I,I8, when Mullei von Hausen (who became infamous as the editoi of the Geiman
veision of the fiaudulent Prctcccls cf the Elders cf Zicn) published a demand foi
eine deutsche Judenoidnung accoiding to which, Alle solche Peisonen gelten
als Juden, deien Voifahien am II. Maiz I8I: (Emanzipationsedikt fui Pieuen)
Juden waien. Schubeit, Dei Weg zui Katastiophe, o:. The culmination of this
eoit was of couise the Nazi Reichsburgergesetz, and the Gesetz zum Schutze des
deutschen Blutes und der deutschen Ehre, both of I,_,.
o8. Kien piotests that he is above taking lthy lucie foi things of the mind,
placing himself thus in the lofty idealist tiadition of Plato (Plato habe veigeblich
o1is 1o v.cis I :8_o : :_,
dagegen angekampft), to which Fischeile iesponds: Plato ist gut! . . . Plato wei
ich. Plato ist ein ieichei Mensch, du bist auch ein ieichei Mensch (DB, :8,).
o,. AF, :,, Ei glaubte an nichts, nui daian, da Jud zu den Veibiechein
gehoit, die sich von selbst bestiafen (DB, :o8).
,o. Petei Gay iemaiks, Impossible as it is to make dependable quantitative
measuiements of such matteis, it seems most likely to me that Jewish ciinging
at Jewish conduct, the most common and most banal expiession of Jewish self-
hatied, giew maikedly duiing the Weimai Republic, fai beyond what it had been
befoie Woild Wai I (Freud, }ews and Other Germans, :oo:oI).
,I. An English exceipt can be found in The Veimar Republic Scurce Bcck, :o8
,I.
,:. AF, I,,, tians. iev., Da soll einei sagen, die Juden sind feig. Die Repoitei
fiagen ihn, wei ei ist. Kein Mensch kennt ihn. Wie ein Ameiikanei schaut ei
nicht aus. Juden gibts ubeiall. Abei von wo ist diesei Jud, dei den Capablanca im
Siegeszug hingemacht hat: (DB, :I,). The iefeience heie is to the Cuban chess-
mastei, Jos Raoul Capablanca (I888I,:).
,_. AF, _o, Dailing! sagt die Millionaiin und zupft ihn dian, sie liebt lange
Nasen, kuize kann sie nicht schmecken (DB, _,,).
,. Fischeiles fantasy about maiiying a iich gentile is an iionic ieveisal of yet
anothei anti-Semitic steieotype: the impoveiished piotestant aiistociat maiiying
a wealthy Jewish heiiess in oidei to save the family foitune. Inteimaiiiage of this
soit did, of couise, occui, and this is pait of the complex stoiy of Jewish assimi-
lation. But it also became the object of anti-Semitic satiie, as Petei Gay notes: A
much-exploited theme foi the jouinal] Simplicissimus was the eete and impov-
eiished Piussian aiistociat iescuing the family foitune with a suitable maiiiage
to a Jewish heiiess. The savageiy of Biuno Pauls covei caitoon on this subject,
published aiound I,oo, is anything but exceptional. Entitled Aiistociatic Woild
View, it depicts a hideous, stunted, obviously Jewish giil accompanied by hei no
less hideous, no less obvious fathei, maiching to the altai with an impecunious
nobleman (Freud, }ews and Other Germans, :o,). Theiefoie Fischeiles iemaik,
Sie heiiatet meinen Namen, ich ihi Geld (DB, :8o), both evokes and paiodies a
well-known anti-assimilationist steieotype. The iionic ieveisal, howevei, is only
paitial: the Jew iemains the physically disguied peison in both tiansactions.
,,. These foui iefeiences to Woild Wai I aie found, iespectively, in DB, :,,
:,_, :,I, and :8o. Fuithei iefeiences can be found in DB, :I8 (wheie standing
in line ieminds Fischeile of the wai), :,, (wheie the pievaiicating blind man
claims to have leained to tell the tiuth in the wai), and _I8 (wheie the women in
the ciowd blame the lack of available men on the casualties of the Gieat Wai).
,o. Mosei, Die Katastiophe dei Juden in Osteiieich, ,o.
,,. AF, _:o, In einei Masse gab es eine Masse zu holen (DB, _,o).
,8. AF, _:8, Fischeile hoite, was man ihm voiwaif . . . Fui Zweige gebe es
:o Jahie. Die Todesstiafe mute wiedei hei. Kiuppel gehoien ausgeiottet. Alle
Veibiechei seien Kiuppel. Nein alle Kiuppel Veibiechei . . . Ei solle liebei was
:_o : o1is 1o v.cis I _o_ I
aibeiten. Ei solle den Leuten nicht das Biot vom Mund wegnehmen. Was fange
ei mit den Peilen an, so ein Kiuppel, und die Judennase gehoie abgehackt (DB,
_,8).
,,. Foi a iecent ciitical assessment of this teim in the context of Geiman
Studies, see Weningei, Zui Dialektik des Dialektiks im deutschen Realismus.
8o. AF, __I, Die Menge fallt ubei sie hei . . . Die Fischeiin stuizt zu Boden.
Sie liegt auf dem Bauch und halt sich still. Sie wiid fuichtbai zugeiichtet . . . An
dei Echtheit des Buckels ist nicht zu zweifeln. Ubei ihn entladt sich die Masse . . .
Dann veilieit sie das Bewutsein (DB, _oI).
8I. Gilman, The }ews Bcdy, :_o.
8:. AF, _:, Angst habe ei doch. Ei sei eben so gebaut. Wenn ei wenigstens
Di. Fischei hiee, statt einfach Fischei, da hatte die Polizei gleich einen Respekt
(DB, _,).
8_. AF, _,,, Dei Anzug sa wie eine gioaitige Kombination. Was vomBuckel
noch ubiigblieb, veischwand unteim Mantel (DB, _,:, on the topic of camou-
aging the Jewish physique with clothes, see also DB, _8:, _8,).
8. The caitoon Jewish Metamoiphosis is iepiinted in Ruth Gay, }ews cf Ger-
many, :__.
8,. AF, _,,, Dei Buckel lag] in den letzten Zugen (DB, _,o).
8o. This passage has all the maikings of guial iewoiking, that is, it appeais
to me that Fischeile is piotesting too much, and that, in the giand tiadition of
this novel, he is attempting to put a good face on a thieatening incident. Such a
judgment must, of couise, iemain somewhat speculative. Howevei, I would point
to those phiases wheie the language seems put to paiticulai stiess: die Buben
tobten und waien auf einmal eiwachsen . . . Meine Heiien, was tut ihi! Noch
ein paai solche Heiien und sie blieben endgultig gio. Fischeiles desiie to take
these iemaiks as homage does not fully eiase the suggestion of haiassment and
manhandling. In fact, he appeais quite lucky to have escaped this gang.
8,. AF, _,,,8, Einige Buben iotteten sich zusammen und waiteten, bis dei
letzte Eiwachsene veischwand. Plotzlich umiingten sie Fischeiles Bank und
biachen in einen englischen Choi aus. Sie heulten yes und meinten Jud. Vcr
seinei Reisefeitigkeit fuichtete Fischeile Buben wie die Pest . . . ei wai jedoch]
kein Jud mehi] und kein Kiuppel, ei wai ein feinei Keil und veistand sich auf
Wigwams (_,o,I). Fischeiles tiansfoimation into an Ameiican is heie undei-
scoied by his alleged familiaiity with Ameiican Indians. His iefeience to wig-
wams alludes to the immensely populai Vinnetcu novels by Kail May, who is
ciedited with mediating images of the Ameiican Wild West to geneiations of
Geimans (up to the piesent), despite the fact that May himself only knew the
United States fiom books. Mays pseudohistoiical iealism is in many iespects
similai to Alexiss, discussed above in chaptei I.
88. AF, _oo, das Bild des wohlgeiatenen Zweigs (DB, _,_). The laigei context
makes cleai that the tailoi takes piide in the fact that he has piovided a suitable
physique foi Fischeiles beautiful spiiit, the implication being that Fischeiles ie-
o1is 1o v.cis I _ I _8 : :_,
cently acquiied cultivation has fooled the tailoi into believing that the dwaif
tiuly is well-bied. Thus we have a iepetition (and modication) of the episode
whenKienist meets Fischeile, inwhichcultuie means eveiything andnothing.
8,. AF, _oo, Auf die Heizensbildung kommt es an (DB, _,_).
,o. AF, _oo, ein fiisch angezogenei Mensch, veijungt und hochgeboien (DB,
_,_).
,I. AF, _oo, Daiaus entnahmFischeile mit Recht und Stolz, da ei nicht mehi
zu eikennen wai (DB, _,).
,:. AF, _o,, Eine Faust schlagt ihmden Schadel ein. Dei Blinde schleudeit ihn
zuBodenundholt vomTischindei Ecke des Kabinetts einBiotmessei. Mit diesem
zeifetzt ei Anzug und Mantel und schneidet Fischeile den Buckel heiuntei. Bei
dei schweienAibeit achzt ei, das Messei ist ihmzustumpf, undLicht will ei keines
machen . . . Ei wickelt den Buckel in die Fetzen des Mantels, spuckt ein paaimal
diauf und lat das Paket so liegen. Die Leiche schiebt ei unteis Bett (DB, _,8).
,_. Fischeiles unawaieness of his own use of Yiddishbecause of the vulneia-
bility it impliesappeais much moie tiagic in histoiical hindsight and may well
constitute one of those factois about this guie that gave Canetti pause inthe post-
Holocaust yeais, see below. In the context of the pie-Holocaust novel, howevei,
theie is legitimate, if undeniably daik, humoi in Fischeiles total obliviousness
to his language. His only hesitation in using the woid meschugge, it tuins out,
is that it might not make much of an impiession on a psychiatiist, foi whom,
Fischeile ieasons, insanity is an eveiyday complaint (see DB, _o8).
,. DB, ,_, AF, I.
,,. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, :oI.
cu.v1iv ,
I. Gay, Freud, ,I,.
:. Stieg concedes as much when he says: Doch scheint mii dei Roman selbst
noch keine Antwoit auf Fieud zu enthalten, sondein ehei die Diohungen dei
Epoche extiem zu aitikulieien, bis hin zui Selbstveinichtung dei Kultui (Ca-
netti und die Psychoanalyse, o,).
_. In Adoino, Canetti: Discussion with Adoino, I:.
. Though Fieud is on Adoinos mind thioughout the conveisation, the most
substantial discussion of Canettis dispute with Fieud focuses on the disagiee-
ment ovei what constitutes a ciowd (Masse). Canetti believes that Fieud exag-
geiates the impoitance of the leadei, and contends that Fieuds whole concept
of identication (by which he means, above all, the Oedipal bond) is insu-
ciently ieected, too impiecise, not ieally cleai (ibid., I_). Cleaily, Canetti wishes
to substitute his cheiished notion of metamoiphosis (Verwandlung) foi Fieuds
Oedipal complex. Adoino agiees that Canettis social theoiiespaiticulaily his
insistence on seeing powei as an exteinal, social thieatiepiesent an impiove-
:_8 : o1is 1o v.cis I _,_
ment ovei Fieuds oveily abstiact (and otheiwise pioblematic) views on society.
On this, see below.
,. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, __.
o. Ibid., :_.
,. This, by the way, is the junctuie wheie Bioch advises Canetti to thiow in the
towel in this puisuit: Es ist schade umdie Zeit, die Sie daian wenden . . . Sie kon-
nen sich nicht einei Wissenschaft widmen, die keine ist und nie eine sein wiid
(ibid., _). So Canetti is cleaily savoiing a kind of ietiospective victoiy when he
iecounts this episode.
8. Ibid., oI.
,. Ibid., I.
Io. Ibid., .
II. Gay, Freud, o,.
I:. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, :_,.
I_. Ibid.
I. Ibid.
I,. Ibid.
Io. These events iecounted in ibid., Io,,_. Canetti often iead his Kcmcdie der
Eitelkeit in tandem with Dei gute Vatei, as on the evening of Max Pulveis ie-
maik quoted heie (ibid., Io,). Thus some of the ieaction given in this paiagiaph
might be constiued to iefei also to the Kcmcdie. Neveitheless, as the following
statement indicates, much of the negative ieception was ieseived explicitly foi
Dei gute Vatei. It is impoitant to know that Canetti iead this chaptei after the
inteimission, duiing the second half of the ieading. Man wai noch eine ganze
Weile beisammen, ich leinte so ziemlich alle kennen, die eischienen waien und
jedei sagte miis auf seine Weise, wie sehi ihn besondeis dei zweite Teil dei Lesung
geaigeit habe (ibid.).
I,. Ibid., Io,.
I8. Ibid., I8.
I,. The subjunctive mood in the following is apposite of the fact that the novel
was of couise still unpublished. Refeiiing to the Zuiich ieading of I,_, (in the
Stadelhofeistiae), Canetti ielates: Dafui hatte ich das Kapitel Dei gute Vatei
ausgesucht, aus dem Roman, dei bald danach Die Blendung betitelt weiden
sollte. Das hatte ich in Wien schon oft voigelesen, piivat und oentlich und ich
wai seinei so sichei, als waie es dei unentbehiliche Teil eines allgemein bekannten
und vielgelesenen Buches (ibid., Io,).
:o. Ibid., I,o.
:I. AF, 88, Jahie sehnte ei sich schon danach, wiedei einmal iecht auf Wei-
beieisch loszuschlagen (DB, ,I).
::. AF, III, Die Weibei gehoien totgeschlagen. Alle wie sie sind (DB, IIo).
:_. AF, IIII:, tians. iev., Meine Fiau, die ist aus den blauen Flecken nicht
heiausgekommen. Meine Tochtei selig, die hab ich gein gehabt, das wai einWeib,
o1is 1o v.cis I _o : :_,
wie man sagt, mit dei hab ich angefangen, wie sie noch ganz klein wai (DB,
II,).
:. AF, :8o, Wenn sie o Jahi jungei wai. Seine Tochtei selig, ja, die wai ein
seelengutes Geschopf. Die hat sich neben ihn legen mussen, wie ei auf die Bettlei
gepat hat. Da hat ei gezwickt und geschaut . . . Geweint hat sie. Es hat ihi nichts
genutzt. Gegen einen Vatei gibts nichts. Lieb wai sie. Auf einmal wai sie tot . . .
Ei hat sie halt gebiaucht (DB, _I_I). The last line, it should be noted, includes
this alteinate[supplemental meaning: He simply used hei.
:,. AF, :8,, tians. iev. While it is lexically possible to iendei Paiteien as ten-
ants, that seems less appiopiiate in this context. Pfas anxieties aie iunning
high: he cleaily feais the authoiities, being aiiested and piosecuted at this junc-
tuie. The Paiteien he has in mind, theiefoie, aie moie likely the plaintis foi the
state in the tiial he imagines will be conducted wheie he will be chaiged with the
muidei of his daughtei. Schanden connotes a iange of semantic possibilities
as I am suie Canetti intendedianging fiom iape to dishonoi. But nowheie
in this spectium does one nd feiiet out, as Wedgwood pioposes. The tenants
have no ieason to be looking foi the daughtei. This coiiection is of some im-
poitance because this is a key passage wheie Pfa convicts himself: the plaintis
ccntinue to violate his daughtei, because this is a piactice he has begun while she
was undei his caie. Some ambiguity is inevitable, howevei, since Pfas manifest
guilt punctuiesbut does not thoioughly claiifythe lies he has been at pains
to put out. The Geiman ieads as follows: Dei Hausbesoigei eistaiit. Ei sieht,
wie jemand jeden Eisten kommt und ihmdie Pension wegnimmt, statt sie ihmzu
biingen. Aueidem wiid ei eingespeiit . . . Alles kommt heiaus, und die Paiteien
schanden seine Tochtei noch imGiab. Ei hat keine Angst . . . Ei ist pensionieit. Ei
hat keine Angst. Dei Doktoi sagt selbei, es sind die Lungen. Schicken Sies foit! Ja
wovon, liebei Heii: Die Pension biaucht ei zumEssen . . . Kiankenkasseja was!
Auf einmal kommt sie ihm mit einem Kind zuiuck. In das kleinwuzige Kabinett.
Ei hat keine Angst! (DB, _Io).
:o. AF, _o, tians. iev. Dei Heii Piofessoi iedete von dei Fiau, abei ei meinte
die Tochtei (DB, __:, see also _:I, __,).
:,. AF, _,o, Dei Vatei hat einen Anspiuch . . . auf die Liebe seines Kindes.
Laut und gleichmaig wie in dei Schule iatschte sie seinen Satz zu Ende . . . Zum
Heiiaten hat die Tochtei . . .ei stieckte den Aim auskeine Zeit. Das Futtei
gibt ihi . . . dei gute Vatei. Die Mannei wollen sie . . . gai nicht haben (DB,
o).
:8. AF, _,, tians. iev., Seit ei sie zui Poli einannt hatte, wai ei stolz auf sie.
Die Weibei seien doch zu etwas gut, dei Mann musse es eben veistehen, lautei
Polis aus ihnen zu machen (DB, o,).
:,. AF, _,I, Stundenlang liebkoste ei sie (DB, o,).
_o. Two factois may, as I have said, inhibit oui acknowledgment of the full
extent of Pfas behavioi: oui own iepulsion and the fact that Pfa, though in-
:o : o1is 1o v.cis I o,
consistent in his denials, is lying about the physical abuse. A piime example of
his discoidant asseitions is to be found at the chapteis outset, wheie within the
space of a paiagiaph he vaiiouslyaccounts foi the death of his wife. In this passage,
which seives as the exposition to Pfas aaii with his own daughtei, we witness
him in the piocess of iecasting the violent death as one attiibutable to natuial
causes: Bald nach diesei Veiandeiung staib die Fiau, voi Ubeianstiengung. Sie
kam dei neuen Kuche nicht nach . . . Oft waitete ei volle funf Minuten aufs Es-
sen. Dann abei ii ihm die Geduld, und ei piugelte sie, noch bevoi ei satt wai.
Sie staib untei seinen Handen. Doch waie sie in den nachsten Tagen bestimmt
und von selbst eingegangen. Ein Moidei wai ei nicht (DB, o:). Though ien-
deied in the ostensibly objective thiid peison, this passage evinces a Pfa no
less in chaige than in the coeiced dialogue we witnessed above. The tianspai-
ent eoits at self-justication (eine volle funf Minuten) and palpable pleading
of his case (Doch, bestimmt) have left unmistakable tiaces of the building
supeiintendents pathetic seelischei Haushalt.
_I. AF, _o,, DB, o.
_:. These nuptial teims can be found in DB, o: and o,.
__. AF, _,:, tians. iev. In tianslating the nal clause as she looks like a maiden
faii, Wedgwood softens the passage unaccountably, oveilooking, fuitheimoie,
the impoitant conjunction da, which links this clause to the pieceding in the
sense of thus, so, as such. Canettis Geiman ieads: Sie nimmt das ganze Geld
mit, ubeis Nachthemdwiift sie ihieneigenenMantel, densie nie tiagendaif, nicht
den alten des Vateis, da sieht sie wie eine Jungfiau aus (DB, oo).
_. Ei ndet ihien Mantel schon. Sie wiid ihn tiagen bis zu ihiem Tod, ei ist
noch neu (DB, o,).
_,. AF, _,,, wahiend sie das Fleisch fui sein Mittagessen weichschlug, klopfte
ei zumVeignugen auf ihi heium. Sein Auge wute nicht, was die Hand tat (DB,
o,).
_o. AF, _o,, die Angst, die dieses Mobelstuck ihi einote (DB, o_).
_,. AF, _,8, tians. iev. sie lebte noch mehieie Jahie als Dienstmadchen und
Weib ihies Vateis (DB, I_).
_8. Heimann Bioch was the ist to see the inuence of Edgai Allen Poe on Die
Blendung, see Canetti, Das Augenspiel, _,.
_,. At the comic conclusion of this subplot, wheie Geoig pietends to be the
Paiisian police commissionei in oidei to appeal to the Hausbesoigeis authoii-
taiian mentality, Pfa tendeis the following unsolicited (and typically ignoied)
confession: Benedikt Pfa, dei staike, iote Lummel, zog seine Muskeln ein,
kniete niedei, faltete die Hande und bat den Heiin Piasidenten um Veigebung.
Die Tochtei sei kiank gewesen, sie ware vcn selbst auch gestcrben, bestens ie-
kommandieie ei sich, ihn nicht von seinem Posten zu veitieiben (DB, ,8, my
emphasis).
o. This sealed-o ioom is itself a wondeiful image of failed iepiession.
Though Pfa shuns the memoiy of the allegedly empty ioom (Jede Eiinneiung
o1is 1o v.cis I ,, : :I
an den leeien Raum daneben mied ei), the text of couise speaks against him.
When Kien, whose position at the peep-hole (Gucklcch) now paiallels piecisely
Annas foimei ieconnaissance assignment, iefuses Pfas demandfoi foodmoney,
the lattei consideis as punishment incaiceiating Kien in the veiy same ioom, wo
das Gemut dei seligen Tochtei veiloiengegangen ist (ibid., :). If not foi the
piopitious aiiival of Geoig, Kienmay indeed have sueied a similai fate. Foi Pfa,
it is only a mattei of wheie to begin: Was soll ei jetzt zueist: Ihm die Beine zei-
biechen, den Schadel einschlagen, das Hiin veispiitzen odei fui den Anfang eine
in den Bauch: (ibid.).
I. Giunbaum, Letteis, :.
:. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, ::o.
_. This view was foicefully aigued in the I,:os by Kaien Hoiney and Einest
Jones, see Gay, Freud, ,I,::.
. Fieud, The Tiansfoimations of Pubeity, ,:::o.
,. Ibid., The Dissolution of the Oedipus Complex, I,:I,8,,.
o. In boys, Heiman aigues, the suppiession of incestuous wishes is ie-
waided by initiation into male piivilege. The giils ienunciation of hei incestuous
wishes nds no compaiable iewaid. It is iathei thiough the consummation of in-
cest that the giil seeks to gain those piivileges which otheiwise must foievei be
denied to hei. Thus the giil has little inducement to oveicome hei infantile attach-
ment to hei fathei . . . The fatheis behavioi towaid his daughtei thus assumes
immense impoitance. If the fathei chooses to eioticize the ielationship with his
daughtei, he will encountei little oi no iesistance. Even when the giil does give
up hei eiotic attachment to hei fathei, she is encouiaged to peisist in the fan-
tasy that some othei man, like hei fathei, will some day take possession of hei
(Father-Daughter Incest, ,,).
,. In Heiman, Father-Daughter Incest, ,.
8. See Gay, Freud, ,_, and Heiman, Father-Daughter Incest, ,. Gay commends
Fieud foi being seveie with himself (,_), and goes on to suggest that this falsi-
cation was an eoit to disguise the patients identity (,). Thus Fieud is seen to
be in a dilemma: toin between the demands of science (full disclosuie) and the
demands of theiapy (condentiality). Heiman suggests that Fieuds motivations
weie less altiuistic.
,. Gay aigues that Fieuds self-image as bouigeois ciitic impelled himtowaid
advocating the female Oedipus complex. Commenting on the celebiated case of
Doia, in which Fieud insists both that his female patient felt a sexual attiaction
foi an oldei man who made an unwanted pass at hei and that she was in love with
hei fathei, Gay obseives: Such a ieading follows natuially fiom Fieuds postuie
as a psychoanalytic detective and a ciitic of bouigeois moiality. Intent on digging
beneath polite social suifaces, and committed to the pioposition that modein
sexuality was scieened by an almost impenetiable blend of unconscious denial
and conscious mendacity, paiticulaily among the iespectable classes, Fieud felt
viitually obliged to inteipiet Doias vehement iejection of Heii K. as a neuiotic
:: : o1is 1o v.cis I ,,o
defense (Freud, :,). A defense, that is, against hei own sexual desiie. Dissatisfy-
ing in Gays account is the fact that the exact opposite case might be made. Why,
indeed, should Fieud feel obliged to set aside Heii K.s unseemly advance and
postulate instead a distinct feeling of sexual excitement (:,) on the pait of his
female analysandwhich feelings, by the way, his patient imly denied: Moie
to the point foi oui puiposes, peihaps, is the queiy, How does this move autho-
iize Fieud as a ciitic of bouigeois moiality: Would he not in fact have quali-
ed as a moie iadical ciitic of bouigeois hypociisy had he confionted the illicit
desiie and violence of fatheis: Heiman suggests an antithetical ieading, which
attiibutes the utility of the Oedipus complex to its function in noimalizing and
inteinalizing an otheiwise unsettling social phenomenon: Fieud concluded that
his patients iepoits of sexual abuse weie fantasies, based on theii own incestu-
ous wishes. To inciiminate daughteis iathei than fatheis was an immense ielief
to him, even though it entailed a public admission that he had been mistaken
(Father-Daughter Incest, Io).
,o. Canetti, Macht und Ubeileben, ,.
,I. In the conveisation mentioned above, Canetti tells Adoino: Theie is above
all the question of the concept of identication. I considei this concept to be insuf-
ciently ieected, too impiecise, not ieally cleai. Fieud says at many places in his
woik when talking of identication that it is a question of an exemplaiy model, of
the child foi example identifying with his fathei and wanting to be like his fathei.
The fathei is the model. Now this is ceitainly iight. But what ieally happens in
this ielation to the model has nevei been shown exactly . . . I have ieally made it
my task to investigate all aspects of metamoiphosis completely afiesh, in oidei to
be able to deteimine what a model actually is, and what ieally occuis between a
model and the peison who follows a model. Only then peihaps will we be able to
have cleaiei ideas about identication. As long as this is not the case I aminclined
to avoid the whole concept of identication (Adoino, Canetti: Discussion with
Adoino, I_). In Crcwds and Pcwer, Canetti eectively ieplaces this notion with
his own moie positive concept of Veiwandlung, which also contains a funda-
mental aspect of identication. Canetti had planned to ietuin to this topic in a
second volume of Crcwds and Pcwer, but this, if wiitten, was nevei published. Foi
a moie substantive explication and ciitique of the teim Veiwandlung, see my
End of Histoiy.
,:. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, I,o.
,_. Ibid., I8_.
,. Wol, Child Abuse in Freuds Vienna, .
,,. Ibid. Wol obseives fuithei: Today theie is heated contioveisy ovei the
development of Fieuds ideas about paients and childien in the I8,os, but it has
not been appieciated that Fieuds Vienna was the scene of a gieat child abuse
sensation, decades and decades befoie the foimulation of the batteied-child syn-
diome (o).
,o. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, I8_.
o1is 1o v.cis I ,o, _ : :_
,,. Ibid., :oI.
,8. Die Betioene fuhlt sich von einei ubeilegenen Macht gepackt, die sie
nicht mehi loslat. Es kann ein Mann sein, dem sie entkommen will, ein Mann,
dei sie geliebt hat und besitzt odei ein Mann wie Peleus, dei sie eist besitzen wiid.
Es kann ein Piiestei sein, dei die Kianke im Namen eines Gottes gefangen halt,
es kann ein Geist odei Gott selbei sein. In jedem Fall ist es wichtig, da das Opfei
die physische Nahe dei ubeilegenen Macht fuhlt, ihien unmittelbaien Gii auf
sich (Canetti, Masse und Macht, _8_). Canettis iathei open challenge to Fieud
can be iead in the section title, Hysteiie, Manie und Melancholie (_,,8o).
,,. Though Canetti is speaking of the novel as a whole when he iemaiks, Es
wai ein eilosendes Gefuhl . . . den Roman in den Handen zu halten, dei von den
dunkelsten Aspekten Wiens genahit wai (DB, I,o), it seems cleai fiom the con-
text that Dei gute Vatei is uppeimost in his mind, this is the junctuie wheie
Canetti iefeis to the obligatoiy ieading of this chaptei.
oo. This, essentially, is the aigument Gay makes (see above), though not with
iefeience to Canetti. Thioughout his magisteiial study of Fieud, Gay ieminds us
that Fieud, though ievolutionaiy in a veiy limited sense, was laigely a social
conseivative. See, foi example, Gay, Freud, I_, I,, ,8.
oI. AF, _,:, tians. iev., Zui Muttei, sagte ei, sie soll sich auch mal fieuen
(o,).
o:. AF, _,:, tians. iev. Wedgwoods ieading evades the oxymoion (heiment-
fuhien, Canettis neologism) in the Geiman: Ich entfuhie Sie heim (DB, oo).
o_. By, foi example, citing the foimula with which most faiiy tales end: Wenn
ihie aime Muttei das eilebt hatte, sie wai heut noch am Leben (DB, oo).
o. See Gay, Freud, ,I,, and Heiman, Father-Daughter Incest, ,8.
o,. AF, _,:, tians. iev., Einen Mann will sie schon, damit sie von zu Hause
wegkommt (DB, o,).
oo. This is ieected, foi example, in the following: Fui sie hatte ei gestohlen,
abei ei stellte sich ungeschickt an. Einem Rittei gelingt alles. Seit ihie Zigaiette
weg wai, liebte sie ihn nicht mehi. Dei Kopf des Vateis sa festei als je (DB,
I:).
o,. AF, _,,, tians. iev., Wohl nahm ei seine Stieftochtei vom Bett heiuntei
und piugelte sie blutig (DB, II). It should be noted that Pfa speaks heie of a
stepdaughtei because since Anna iebelled against his authoiity and iejected the
name Poli, he denies that she ieally is his daughtei, in much the same way that
Kien denies Theieses existence.
o8. Sein lacheilichei Wunsch ist natuilich auf ein Jugendeilebnis zuiuck-
zufuhien. Man mute ihn einmal unteisuchen . . . Die Voistellung eines Geistes-
kianken ist von Jugend auf mit seinei Lust veibunden. Ei fuichtet die Impotenz
(DB, ,o).
o,. Ei ist ein Mann, was hat jetzt zu geschehen: . . . Sobald es geschehen ist,
wiid sie ihn bewundein, weil ei ein Mann ist. So sollen alle Fiauen sein. Es ge-
schieht also jetzt. Abgemacht. Ei gibt sich sein Ehienwoit (DB, ,8).
: : o1is 1o v.cis I ,,,
,o. AF, ,,, Abei die schweien Tiaume dei letzten Zeit duiften mit seinem
ubeitiieben stiengen Leben zusammenhangen. Das wiid jetzt andeis (DB, ,,).
,I. AF, I,, tians. iev., Was bediangte ihn, ein beinahe geschlechtsloses
Wesen: (DB, ,,).
,:. AF, :I, tians. iev. Wedgwood skiits the issue of sexual abstinence entiiely,
Petei gehoit ineine geschlossene Anstalt. Ei hat zu lange enthaltsamgelebt (DB,
oooI).
,_. Fiosch, Pclitics cf Psychcanalysis, Io.
,. Though Fieud has of couise been ieciuited foi iadical politics and wide-
ianging cultuial ciiticism, above all by the Fiankfuit School, this inevitably
involves iediessing and modifying fundamental aspects of Fieuds theoiy and
piactice. Above all, this has meant focusing on the social enviionmentas medi-
ated by the fatheiin the socialization piocess. The Oedipus complex, in othei
woids, has had to be opened up to include social, political, and cultuial factois
not emphasized by Fieud. Stephen Fiosh explicates and iesponds to the chaige
that psychoanalysis is essentially a bouigeois discipline (Pclitics cf Psychcanaly-
sis, Io). Indeed, his whole book should be seen as an attempt to iehabilitate Fieud
foi social analysis. The amenability of tiaditional psychoanalysis to social consei-
vatism is often cited in connection with the postwai populaiity of psychoanalysis
in the United States.
,,. Stieg, Canetti und die Psychoanalyse, o, and o8, iespectively.
,o. AF, _I_:, tians. iev., Geoig bemeikte sehi wohl, wann Peteis Stimme
ubeischnappte. Es genugte, da seine Gedanken zui Fiau oben zuiuckkehiten. Ei
spiach noch gai nicht von ihi und schon veiiiet sich in dei Stimme ein schieien-
dei, giellei, unheilbaiei Ha . . . Man mute ihn zwingen, moglichst viel von
seinem Ha pieiszugeben. Wenn ei doch einfach die Eieignisse, so wie sie sich
ihm eingepiagt hatten, eizahlend bis an ihien Uispiung zuiuckveifolgte! Geoig
veistand es, bei solchen Ruckblicken den Radieigummi zu spielen, dei alle Spuien
auf dem empndlichen Blatt dei Eiinneiung ausloschte (DB, ,_).
,,. Gay, Freud, o,oo.
,8. The allusion is to Bieueis phiase wegeizahlen, stemming fiom the eaily
phase of psychoanalysis when Fieud and Bieuei weie still collaboiating. See ibid.,
oo and oo n. o,.
,,. Fieud, Fiagment of an Analysis of a Case of Hysteiia, ,:IIo. Fieud ist
came to iecognize the phenomenon cleaily in Doia (,I::), he would ietuin to
the topic specically in the papeis The Dynamics of Tiansfeience (I::,,Io8)
and Obseivations on Tiansfeience Love (I::I,,,I).
8o. Fiosh, Pclitics cf Psychcanalysis, ,o. Fiosh explicates the point fuithei:
Thus, in the context of the ielationship with the analyst, the patient iepioduces
hei[his impulses, fantasies and desiies which aie diiected towaids othei cuiient
and past objects . . . Distinctively when compaied with some latei theoiists, Fieud
aigues that although tiansfeience is expeiienced by the patient as ieal and as ie-
o1is 1o v.cis I ,, ,8 : :,
feiiing to the peison of the analyst, it actually has nothing to do with cuiient
inteiactions (,,).
8I. AF, I_, Statt zu veiaibeiten und zu entgegnen, nahm ei mechanisch auf
(DB, ,:).
8:. Fieud, Recommendations to Physicians Piacticing Psycho-Analysis, I::
II8.
8_. Fiosch, Pclitics cf Psychcanalysis, ,:.
8. AF, _,,, Da eiwaib ei, wenn ei es noch nicht hatte, spielend das Veitiauen
von Menschen, die sich jedem andeien gegenubei hintei ihie Wahngebilde vei-
steckten. Konige iedete ei unteitanigst als Euie Majestat an, voi Gottein el ei
auf die Knie und faltete die Hande. So lieen sich die eihabensten Heiischaften
zu ihm heiab und teilten ihm Naheies mit. Ei wuide ihi einzigei Veitiautei, den
sie, vom Augenblick ihiei Aneikennung ab, ubei die Veiandeiung ihiei eigenen
Beieiche auf dem laufenden hielten und um Rat angingen. Ei beiiet sie mit hellei
Klugheit, als hatte ei selbst ihie Wunsche, immei ihi Ziel und ihien Glauben im
Auge . . . schlielich sei ei doch ihi Ministei, Piophet und Apostel, odei zuweilen
sogai dei Kammeidienei (DB, _).
8,. Fiosh, Pclitics cf Psychcanalysis, ,,.
8o. Ibid., 8o.
8,. AF, _,,,8, tians. iev.: I have substituted schizophienia foi Wedgwoods
alteinating peisonalities. Since the Gieek ioot of schizophienia actually
means a splitting of the mind (Laplanche and Pontalis, Language cf Psychcanaly-
sis, o8), this teim would seem to captuie bettei Bewutseinsspaltungen. Of
couise, the ensuing text does not suppoit the stiict clinical denition of schizo-
phienia (which, howevei, is inits owniight a disputedmattei), but neithei canthis
be expected of such a satiiical passage. The Geiman oiiginal ieads: Heftig um-
stiitten wai in dei gelehiten Welt seine Behandlung von Bewutseinsspaltungen
dei veischiedensten Ait. Gebaidete sich zum Beispiel ein Kiankei als zwei Men-
schen, die nichts miteinandei gemein hatten odei sich bekampften, so wandte
Geoiges Kien eine Methode an, die ihm anfangs selbst sehi gefahilich eischien:
ei befieundete sich mit beiden Paiteien . . . Dann ging ei an die Heilung heian.
In seinem eigenen Bewutsein naheite ei die getiennten Teile des Kianken, wie
ei sie veikoipeite, und fugte sie langsam aneinandei (DB, __,).
88. Gayobseives that this aspect of the Doia case left Fieud opento considei-
able ciiticism: This laigely implicit claimtoviitual omniscience invited ciiticism,
it suggested Fieuds ceitainty that all psychoanalytic inteipietations aie automati-
cally coiiect, whethei the analysand accepts them oi disdains them. Yes means
Yes, and so does No (Freud, :,o). Fieud latei iecantedoi, moie accuiately,
qualied this position, but not until I,_,, that is, well aftei the publication of Autc-
da-Fe in I,_,.
8,. This fiom a iemaik about Bioch wheie Canetti is discussing Biochs Fieud
enthusiasm: Es wai kein kaltes odei machtgieiiges Schweigen, wie es von dei
:o : o1is 1o v.cis I ,8oI
Analyse hei bekannt ist, wo es daiumgeht, da ein Mensch sich iettungslos einem
andeien ausliefeit, dei sich kein Gefuhl fui odei gegen ihn eilauben darf (Das
Augenspiel, _).
,o. AF, o,, Abei Jean, sie liegt im Netz, siehst du sie nicht: Immei hatte ei
iecht. Dei Fieund onete den Mund, und schon wai die Fiau da (DB, ,).
,I. AF, o,, tians. iev. While Wedgwoods iendeiing fails to connote that
Geoig actually conjuies Jeanne foi his patient eveiy day, I am peihaps guilty heie
of oveicoiiection. The Geiman ieads: Alle Tage veihalf ei Jean zu ihi (DB, 8).
,:. AF, II, tians. iev., Von dei viel tiefeien und eigentlichsten Tiiebkiaft dei
Geschichte, demDiang dei Menschen, in eine hoheie Tieigattung, die Masse, auf-
zugehen und sich daiin so vollkommen zu veilieien, als hatte es nie einen Men-
schen gegeben, ahnten sie nichts. Denn sie waien gebildet, und Bildung ist ein
Festungsguitel des Individuums gegen die Masse in ihm selbst (DB, ,).
,_. AF, II, tians. iev. Because the English tianslation of Masse und Macht by
Caiol Stewait uses ciowd foi Masse, I have done so heie as well. Additionally,
I have substituted individuals foi Wedgwoods single people to avoid a mis-
undeistanding (such as unmaiiied). I suspect one could go a step fuithei heie
and add an adjective such as monadic oi isolated to captuie the contextual
meaning of the die ubiigen einzelnen. The Geiman ieads: Zahllose Menschen
weiden veiiuckt weil die Masse in ihnen besondeis staik ist und keine Befiiedi-
gung ndet. Nicht andeis eiklaite ei sich selbst und seine Tatigkeit. Fiuhei hatte
ei peisonlichen Neigungen, seinem Ehigeiz und den Fiauen gelebt, jetzt lag ihm
nui daian, sich unaufhoilich zu veilieien. In diesei Tatigkeit kam ei Wunschen
und Sinnen dei Masse nahei, als die ubiigen einzelnen, von denen ei umgeben
wai (DB, ,o).
,. DB, ,o.
,,. AF, I:, Ein tiauiigei Tag, sagte ei sich leise . . . immei atmete ei imStiom
fiemdei Empndungen. Heute spuite ei nichts um sich, nui die schweie Luft
(DB, ,I).
,o. AF, I_, Meine Fiau langweilt mich (DB, ,:).
,,. AF, I_, tians. iev., Hau ihi nui eine heiuntei, sagte Geoiges, diese
zweiunddieiigjahiige Tieue hatte ei satt. Jean schlug zu und schiie selbst fui die
Fiau um Hilfe (DB, ,I).
,8. AF, I_, Aueidem wai die Wachstafel im Schmelzen (DB, ,:).
,,. AF, I, Waiumgeh ich nicht endlich in die Wohnung: Weil die Fiau doit
auf mich waitet. Sie will Liebe . . . Die Wachstafel diuckte (DB, ,_).
Ioo. AF, oo, Seine Fiau hielt es nach wenigenWochen aueistei Aimut nicht
mehi bei ihm aus und biannte mit einem Unteioziei duich (DB, ).
IoI. The veiy concept of tiansfeience shoit-ciicuits any eoit to situate the
analysands piojections onto the analyst within the context of economic, social, oi
adult inteisubjective ielationships. Foi, as Petei Biooks ieminds us, Tiansfeience
is itself a kind of metaphoi, a substitutive mediumfoi the analysands infantile ex-
peiiences (Reading fcr the Plct, ,,). Laplanche and Pontalis elucidate fuithei: As
o1is 1o v.cis I oI o : :,
an expansion of the second Fieudian theoiy of the psychical appaiatus, the ana-
lytic tieatment may be deemed to piovide the giound on which intiasubjective
conictsthemselves the ielics of the ieal oi phantasied inteisubjective ielation-
ships of childhoodcan once moie nd expiession in a ielationship wheie com-
munication is possible. As Fieud noted, the analyst may foi example nd himself
placed in the position of the supei-ego, moie geneially, the whole inteiplay of
identications is given fiee iein to develop and to become unbound (Language
cf Psychcanalysis, oo).
Io:. In seinei Wohnung iichtete ei Bett und Netz hei, die Fiau waie endlich
aufgetaucht. Jean tiate leise heiein und zoge das Netz zu (DB, 8).
Io_. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, I_,.
Io. Gay, Freud, ,,:.
Io,. Stieg, Canetti und die Psychoanalyse, oo.
Ioo. Gay explains this as in pait due to the state of biological science: These
conicting appiaisals of the instincts] ieach down to the fundamentals of psy-
chology as a science. Fieud was nevei completely happy with his theoiy of the
diives, whethei in its eaily oi its late foim. In On Naicissism he lamented
the complete lack of a theoiy of the diivesTiieblehiethat might piovide the
psychological investigatoi with a dependable oiientation. This absence of theo-
ietical claiity was in laige pait due to the inability of biologists and psychologists
to geneiate a consensus on the natuie of diives oi instincts (Freud, _I).
Io,. Though he begins by suggesting that Fieuds teimite metaphoi oeis a
fiuitful point of compaiison, and pioceeds to aigue, da Canetti hiei auch ein
iionisches Spiel mit dei Psychoanalyse tieibt (Canetti und die Psychoanalyse,
o8o,), Stieg ends up postulating that Canetti actually employs Fieuds con-
cepts of iepiession and sublimation in oidei to mount a ciitique of high cultuie:
Canetti] zeigt uns in dei Blendung die Kultui in dei Gestalt Petei Kiens als Aus-
diuck dei extiemsten Veieinzelung, dei konsequentesten Distanz zu den andeien
Menschen, allenvoiandenFiauen. Ei zeigt sie uns als Hochkultui ineinemduich-
aus Fieudschen Licht als Exzesse dei Veidiangung und Sublimation. Mit Fieud zu
spiechen, waie Petei Kiens Ende eine iadikale Wiedeikehi des Veidiangten (o,).
Io8. AF, _:, tians. iev., Manche Insekten schon haben es bessei als wii.
Eine odei einige wenige Muttei biingen den ganzen Stock zui Welt. Die ubiigen
Tieie sind zuiuckgebildet. Kann man engei beisammenleben, als die Teimiten
es gewohnt sind: Welche fuichtbaie Summe geschlechtlichei Reizungen mute
ein solchei Stock voistellen . . . besaen die Tieie noch ihi Geschlecht! Sie be-
sitzen es nicht, und die dazugehoiigen Instinkte nui in geiingem Mae. Selbst
dieses Wenige fuichten sie. Im Schwaim, bei dem Tausende und Abeitausende
von Tieien scheinbai sinnlos zugiunde gehen, sehe ich eine Befieiung von dei
gespeicheiten Geschlechtlichkeit des Stockes. Sie opfein einen kleinen Teil ihiei
Masse, um den gioeien von Liebeswiiiungen fieizuhalten. Dei Stock wuide an
Liebe, waie sie einmal eilaubt, zugiunde gehen (DB, ,).
Io,. Laplanche and Pontalis, Language cf Psychcanalysis, :II,.
:8 : o1is 1o v.cis I o, o8
IIo. AF, _:__, tians. iev., Ich wei keine gioaitigeie Voistellung als die
einei Oigie im Teimitenstock. Die Tieie veigesseneine ungeheueiliche Eiin-
neiung hat sie gepacktwas sie sind, blinde Zellen eines fanatischen Ganzen.
Jedes will fui sich sein, bei hundeit odei tausend von ihnen fangt es an, dei
Wahn gieift um sich, ihr Wahn, ein Massenwahn, die Soldaten veilassen die Ein-
gange, dei Stock biennt voi unglucklichei Liebe, sie konnen ja nicht paaien, sie
haben kein Geschlecht, dei Laim, die Eiiegung, alles Gewohnte ubeibietend,
lockt ein Ameisengewittei an, duich die unbewachten Toie diingen die Todfeinde
ein, welchei Kiiegei denkt an Veiteidigung, jedei will Liebe, dei Stock, dei viel-
leicht Ewigkeiten gelebt hatte, die Ewigkeiten, nach denen wii uns sehnen, stiibt,
stiibt an Liebe, an demTiieb, duich den wii, eine Menschheit, unsei Weiteileben
fiisten! Eine plotzliche Veikehiung des Sinnieichsten ins Sinnloseste (DB, ,).
III. Fiosh, Pclitics cf Psychcanalysis, o.
II:. AF, _:, Oenbai eiwaitete ei von Geoig ihie Entfeinung (DB, ,_).
II_. AF, _:, tians. iev., Ich glaube, da du die Bedeutung dei Fiauen staik
ubeischatzt. Du nimmst sie zu einst, du haltst sie fui Menschen wie wii. Ich sehe
in den Fiauen ein nui voilaug notwendiges Ubel. Manche Insekten haben es
bessei als wii (DB, ,_,).
II. AF, , Welches Elend in alle Zukunft! (DB, 8,).
II,. AF, , tians. iev., Waium in alle Zukunft: Wii spiachen doch voihin
von den Teimiten, die das Geschlecht ubeiwunden haben. Es ist also wedei ein
unbedingtes noch ein unausiottbaies Ubel (DB, 8,).
IIo. AF, _:, tians. iev., wenn (Kien) doch einfach die Eieignisse . . . eizahlend
bis an ihien Uispiung zuiuckveifolgte! (DB, ,_, see also ,8).
II,. Which is not to say that Geoigs thieat falls on deaf eais. Indeed, it is
cleai that this image of the Liebesaufiuhi imTeimitenstock has buiiowed itself
deeply into Kiens consciousness, foi he feels compelled to iefute it thioughout
this chaptei (see DB, ,,, 8,, 8,, ,o).
II8. AF, _,, tians. iev., Aus eigenem Willen allein, von niemandem untei-
stutzt, nicht einmal einen Mitwissei besa ich, habe ich mich von einem Diuck,
einei Last, einem Tod, einei Rinde von veiuchtem Gianit befieit. Wo waie ich
wenn ich auf dich gewaitet hatte: (DB, ,,).
II,. Fieud, Civilizaticn and Its Disccntents, :I:,,.
I:o. Fiosh, Pclitics cf Psychcanalysis, ,. Gays exegesis of Civilizaticn and Its
Disccntents coiioboiates Fioshs on this point: Women, who have incieasingly
become loves guaidians, aie paiticulaily hostile to civilization that coineis the
attention of theii men and the seivice of theii childien (Freud, ,8).
I:I. AF, __, die wiiklichen gioen Denkei sind vom Unweit dei Fiau ubei-
zeugt (DB, ,,).
I::. AF, _,, tians. iev., though neithei Wedgwood noi I has done justice to
the idiomatic phiase das Blaue vom Himmel heiunteilugen, which means to
lie shamelessly and is heie cleveily ieveised by Kien: Ich weide dii beweisen,
da alle Fiauen Ha veidienen, du meinst ich veistunde mich nui auf den Oiient.
o1is 1o v.cis I o,,, : :,
Die Beweise, die ei biaucht, holt ei sich aus seinen Spezialgebietendas denkst
du dii. Ich weide dii das Blaue vom Himmel heiunteiholen, abei keine Lugen,
Wahiheiten, schone, haite, spitze Wahiheiten, Wahiheiten jedei Gioe und Ait,
Wahiheiten fuis Gefuhl und Wahiheiten fui denVeistand, obwohl bei dii nui das
Gefuhl funktionieit, du Weib (DB, ,,).
I:_. Robeits, Ciowds and Powei oi the Natuial Histoiy, ,.
I:. Ibid., ,,o.
I:,. Foi example, Fiosh notes that foi Fieud theie is no necessity to conceive
of any inheient embeddedness of the] individual in cultuie, a chaiacteiistic as-
sumption of most piogiessive philosophies. Explanation of behavioui is piovided
by the vicissitudes of instinct, the enviionment is only ielevant to the extent that
it suppoits oi opposes satisfaction (Pclitics cf Psychcanalysis, :,).
I:o. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, :. Biochs iemaiks iefei heie to both Die Blen-
dung and the contempoianeous play Hcchzeit.
I:,. Adoino, Canetti: Discussion with Adoino, I_, Adoino also takes appiov-
ing notice of Canettis emphasis on the violence within society that is often con-
cealed fiom view (I).
I:8. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, I:_.
I:,. Canetti, Crcwds and Pcwer, I:. In the oiginal, Canetti undeiscoies the
sense of equality by italicizing the woid gleiche.
I_o. Canetti, Masse und Macht, :o.
I_I. Though Caiol Stewait tianslates Stachel as sting, I continue to piefei
thoin because it moie accuiately iepiesents Canettis almost mechanistic con-
cept andalso piovides a sense of the ongoing substantialityof this concept. Sting
may suggest a pain that dissipates ovei time, possibly on its own. Canettis cuiious
notion of thoins is quite dieient.
I_:. Foi a biief oveiview, see my encyclopedia entiy Ciowds and Powei.
cu.v1iv o
I. Eailiei McFailane had iejected the chaiacteiization of modeinism as eithei
the ieconciliation of opposites oi as ambivalence, claiming instead a much
moie complex model: It is then as though the Modeinist puipose ought to be
dened as the iesolution of Hegel with Kieikegaaid, committing oneself neithei
wholly to the notion of both[and, noi wholly to the notion of eithei[oi, but (as
it weie) to bothand to neithei. Dauntingly, then, the Modeinist foimula be-
comes both[and and[oi eithei[oi (Mind of Modeinism, 88). In championing
Eliot and Canetti, as we shall see, McFailane appeais to diop the Kieikegaaidian
side of his aigument.
:. Ibid., ,:.
_. Ibid., ,I.
. Stevensons book is built aiound this notion, which he denes in this man-
:,o : o1is 1o v.cis I ,, , ,
nei: philosopheis such as Beigson, Nietzsche and William James all suggest a
change in something as fundamental as the ielation of mind and woilda kind of
epistemological shift, fiomielative condence towaids a sense of incieasedunieli-
ability and unceitainty in the means by which ieality is appiehended in thought
(Mcdernist Ficticn, II). Stevenson qualies this cential idea by iefeiiing to Fou-
caults paiallel concept of paiadigm shifts, which is meant to iemind us that phi-
losophy should not naively be constiued as the cause of changes in ait: Though
it would obviously be misleading to iule out any possibility of philosophy inu-
encing life oi liteiatuie diiectly, ielations between the vaiious spheies need to be
consideied iecipiocal iathei than only hieiaichical (I_).
,. On the iich vaiiety of modeinism, see, foi example Biadbuiy and McFai-
lane: In shoit, Modeinismwas in most countiies an extiaoidinaiy compound of
the futuiistic and the nihilistic, the ievolutionaiy and the conseivative, the natu-
ialistic and the symbolist, the iomantic and the classical. It was a celebiation of
a technological age and a condemnation of it, an excited acceptance of the belief
that the old iegimes of cultuie weie ovei, and a deep despaiiing in the face of that
feai, a mixtuie of convictions that the new foims weie escapes fiom histoiicism
and the piessuies of the time with convictions that they weie piecisely the living
expiessions of these things (Name and Natuie of Modeinism, o).
o. Aiguing against Lukcss claimthat modeinismwishes utteily to escape his-
toiy and politics, Jameson aigues that the modeinist pioject is moie adequately
undeistood as the intent . . . to manage histoiical and social, deeply political im-
pulses, that is to say, to defuse them, to piepaie substitute giatications foi them
(in Stevenson, Mcdernist Ficticn, ::o).
,. Lukcs, Ideology of Modeinism, :I.
8. Tiiesiass visionaiy acumen, it must be stiessed, deiives not only fiom his
paiadoxical visionaiy blindness, but fioman almost mystical ontological status
that peimits him to iesolve within his own andiogynous peison the full iange
of the poems diamatis peisonae (McFailane, Mind of Modeinism, ,I).
,. Ibid.
Io. Quoted in ibid., ,o.
II. Ibid., ,I.
I:. Ibid., ,:.
I_. Ibid.
I. Ibid., 8,.
I,. Ibid., ,:.
Io. The conventional use of the teim mcdernism to denote the poets, novel-
ists, and ciitics who ieacted against the piocess of modeinizationthe advance
of industiialization, buieauciacy, science, technology, and othei institutions of
modeinityhas been iendeied incieasingly pioblematic by the moie fiequent
use of the same teim, within the same discouise, to iefei to the theoiists who
inspiied and defended this pioject of the masteiy of natuie, oi who ciiticized it
fiom a peispective moie sympathetic than that displayed by T. S. Eliot and othei
o1is 1o v.cis I , ,8I : :,I
guies in the modeinist canon (Knowei and Aiticei, ,o). Hollingei goes on
to note Maishall Beimans iecent and ambitiously inclusive biief foi modeinism,
which Hollingei attiibutes in pait to Beimans stiuggle against the heimeneutic
impeiialism of the postmodeinists (,o).
I,. Ibid., :,.
I8. The chief signicance of the Knowei and Aiticei is not that so many
intellectuals weie willing to choose one absolutely ovei the othei but that so many
weie willing to dene the dilemmas and oppoitunities of modein cultuie so ex-
tensively in the teims of these two peisonae (ibid., _o, see also _o).
I,. Huyssen, After the Great Divide, ix.
:o. This and the quotation diiectly pieceding it can be found in ibid.
:I. Ibid., vi.
::. Jameson, Afteiwoid, :o,. The ieal pioof of Adoinos eiioi, Jameson ai-
gues, is the fact that capitalism has successfully commodied modeinist ait to an
amazing extent. Commenting on Adoinos claimfoi the political ecacy of mod-
einism, Jameson notes: In ietiospect, this now seems a most unexpected ievival
of a Lukcs-type ieection theoiy of aesthetics, undei the spell of a political and
histoiical despaii that plagues both houses and nds piaxis hencefoith unimagin-
able. What is ultimately fatal to this newand nally itself once moie anti-political
ievival of the ideology of modeinism is less the equivocal ihetoiic of Adoinos
attack on Lukcs oi the paitiality of his ieading of Biecht, than veiy piecisely the
fate of modeinism in consumei society itself (:o,).
:_. It is not the fact that high modeinism is inheiently ambivalent about the
disintegiating modein woild (as many commentatois continue to believe) that
collapses the opposition, but that in its veiy tianscendent, conciliatoiy, unifying
mode ( la Eliot) high modeinismdissolves the distinction by encompassing both
optionsciitique and iesolution, oi, bettei: iesolution as ciitiqueleaving the
ideology of modeinism, so to speak, in the eye of the beholdei.
:. Adoino, Commitment, I,o.
:,. Fiied in Ein Dichter gegen Macht und Tcd.
:o. Adoino, Commitment, I,o.
:,. See, foi example, Lawience Langeis Admitting the Hclccuaust and The
Hclccaust and the Literary Imaginaticn as well as Alvin Rosenfeld, ADcuble Dying
and Thinking abcut the Hclccaust.
:8. Adoino, Commitment, I8o, my emphasis.
:,. Ibid., I,_, the phiase quoted diiectly above (the veiy featuies . . .) can be
found in ibid., I88.
_o. The uncalculating autonomy of woiks which avoid populaiization and
adaptation to the maiket, involuntaiily becomes an attack on them . . . Woiks of
ait that ieact against empiiical ieality obey the foices of that ieality, which ieject
intellectual cieations and thiow them back on themselves. Theie is no mateiial
content, no foimal categoiy of aitistic cieation, howevei mysteiiously tiansmit-
ted and itself unawaie of the piocess, which did not oiiginate in the empiiical
:,: : o1is 1o v.cis I 8I ,o
ieality fiom which it bieaks fiee (ibid., I,o). Yet how this actually woiks iemains
shiouded in mysteiy, and thus a vulneiable point in Adoinos aesthetic theoiy.
That Schillei was in fact on his mind while wiiting this essay can be gleaned fiom
this ciiticism of Saitie: The content of his ait becomes philosophy as with no
othei wiitei except Schillei (ibid., I8:).
_I. Ibid., I,o, my emphasis.
_:. Ibid., I,o,I.
__. Ibid., I,.
_. Foi a ciitical tieatment of iealisms panoptic epistemic piivilege, see
Doiiit Cohn, Optics and Powei in the Novel.
_,. Biadbuiy and McFailane, Name and Natuie of Modeinism, ,.
_o. Lukcs, Ideology of Modeinism, :o.
_,. Adoino, Commitment, I,I.
_8. Szondis obseivation, which deiives fiom Lukcss pathbieaking assess-
ment of Expiessionism, is quoted in Schuiei, Nebeneinander. Aspekte dei Kultui
dei Weimaiei Republik, o:.
_,. On othei ways that the novel exoneiates the piotagonist, see Tatai, Gen-
dei, Violence, and Agency in Doblins Berlin Alexanderplatz.
o. Biadbuiy and McFailane, Name and Natuie of Modeinism, :,.
I. Bindei distinguishes visicnpar derriere (Daistellung eines Eilebnisses vom
Eizahl-Ich aus fiomvisicn avec (Daistellung eines Eilebnisses vomEilebnis-Ich
aus), quoted in Jayne, Erkenntnis und Transzendenz, I8.
:. Signicantly, it was not until the newei modeinist paiadigms displaced the
tiaditional high modeinist model that Kafkas humoi was iediscoveied. Though
Kafka was known to laugh duiing his own ieadings, the high modeinist con-
stiuction of Kafka, which contains the most diveise and mutually exclusive of
appioaches, was dominated by a seiious, even lugubiious, ieading.
_. Huyssen, After the Great Divide, ,,.
. Ibid., II.
,. In discussing Biecht (in Commitment, I8:), Adoino opposes modeinist
abstiaction to identication.
o. See Canetti, Das Augenspiel, I_I and I:.
,. An eaily document of Geiman liteiaiy modeinism, Hofmannsthals Lcrd
Chandcs Brief, piovides a cleai example of the contiast between the iepiesenta-
tion of individual psychic diusion and geneial cultuial anomie on the one hand,
and the analysis of this situation, implicit in the veiy eloquent and sophisticated
foimulation, on the othei. Loid Chandoss piedicament cannot, in othei woids,
be equated with Hofmannsthals.
8. An example of this appioach is Robeit Holubs Reecticns cf Realism.
,. Adoinos dismissal of Saities liteiaiy attempt to incite individual subjects
to fiee and active choice was based on the piemise that late capitalismhad devised
an all-inclusive administeied univeise, a political oidei puiged of contiadiction
and theiefoie of the objective possibility of choice . . . It should be added heie
o1is 1o v.cis I ,o, : :,_
that the notion of a iesidual tianscendental subject was stiuctuially essential to
Adoinos thought, fuinishing the only point of leveiage in a putatively totalitai-
ian social oidei (and founding the possibility of a thought that could indict it as
such). No assessment of his aesthetics can oveilook this semi-miiaculous peisis-
tence of the subject in a conceptual schema that posits its complete ieication.
Saities belief in the ecacy of individual engagement seems much less question-
able than a theoiy in which the pioduction of autonomous woiks of ait is little
less than magical (Jameson, Piesentation IV, I,).
,o. On this see Zuideivaaits Adcrncs Aesthetic Thecry, especially chaptei o,
Political Migiation (I::,).
,I. See, foi example, this statement: Bydismantling appeaiance, autonomous
woiks of ait] explode fiom within the ait which committed pioclamation sub-
jugates fiom without, and hence only in appeaiance. The inescapability of theii
woik compels the change of attitude which committed woiks meiely demand
(Adoino, Commitment, I,I).
,:. The moment of tiue volition, howevei, is mediated thiough nothing othei
than the foim of the woik itself, whose ciystallization becomes an analogy of that
othei condition which should be. As eminently constiucted and pioduced ob-
jects, woiks of ait, including liteiaiy ones, point to a piactice fiom which they
abstain: the cieation of a just life (ibid., I,).
,_. Biechts was suiely one of the veiy few voices within modeinism ciying
out in open suppoit of this analytic self , indeed, his whole aesthetic piogiam
depends upon it. But Biechts oveitly Communist politics and his piimaiy intei-
est in diama, as well as Adoinos unspaiing ciiticism of him, ensuied that he
would have little eect on the constiuction of Anglo-Ameiican high modeinism.
Though he piaised Biechts goals, Adoino deiided his output as naively didactic,
puiveying bad politics, and as amenable to ieadings fiom ocial humanism
(Commitment, I88). On Biechts ieception in the United States, see Mews, An
Un-Ameiican Biecht:
,. Lukcs, Ideology of Modeinism, :o:,.
,,. This pointthat iich psychological poitiayal can seive to validate a state
of aaiis intended foi ciitiquemay in fact explain Biochs own doubts about the
value of ait. Still, as Roche points out, Biochs ciitique ietains and indeed exem-
plies aits inheiently pioleptic function. See Roche, National Socialism and
the Disintegiation of Values, _,,.
,o. Zuideivaait uses the teim depiivileged subject as a designation foi the
epistemologically weakened, fiagmented self: Deep in this movement is the im-
pulse to depiive the subject of its piivileged position. In philosophy, this impulse
opposes the constitutive knowei ist cleaily aiticulated in Descaitess ccgitc ergc
sum (Adcrncs Aesthetic Thecry, :,o), this, along with the phiase depiivation of
the subject, desciibes peihaps moie helpfully what is commonly iefeiied to as the
modeinist fiagmented self oi what Stevenson has called the epistemological
shift.
:, : o1is 1o v.cis I ,, ,8
,,. Lukcs, Fianz Kafka oi Thomas Mann:, ,I.
,8. Lukcs, Ideology of Modeinism, :o:I.
,,. Ibid., :I.
oo. Lukcs aigues: In any piotest against paiticulai social conditions, these
conditions themselves must have the cential place (ibid., :,). Yet Canetti manages
to keep widei social conceins on oui mind without this soit of positive depic-
tion. On the othei hand, we come to see the subjectivist fantasies as themselves
evidence of a highly pioblematic sccial piactice.
oI. Ibid., _,. Lukcs iathei diiectly blames philosophy, and Beigson in pai-
ticulai, foi this subjectivist tuin in liteiatuie: Subjective Idealism had alieady
sepaiated time, abstiactly conceived, fiom histoiical change and paiticulaiity of
place. As if this sepaiation weie insucient foi the newage of impeiialism, Beig-
son widened it fuithei. Expeiienced time, subjective time, now became identical
with ieal time, the iift between this time and that of the objective woild was com-
plete. Beigson and othei philosopheis who took up and vaiied this theme claimed
that theii concept of time alone aoided insight into authentic, i.e. subjective,
ieality. The same tendency soon made its appeaiance in liteiatuie (ibid., _,).
o:. It could be aigued that Canetti is as close to Adoino as he is to Lukcs in
this iejection of histoiicism (undeistood as a foim of false consciousness). But
Canettis method of engagement would undoubtedly have appalled Adoino, foi
he opts to distance himself fiom this foim of populist diveision by means of pai-
ody iathei than choosing an unconsumable modeinist aesthetic, foi this paiody
cannot function without iesuiiecting and ieinsciibing its iealist taiget. Though
allied in theii iejection of the often disguised consolations of liteiatuie, Canetti
and Adoino weie, of couise, to iemain woilds apait iegaiding aesthetic policy:
Adoinos almost masochistic aesthetic, developed in iesponse to Nazism and the
Holocaust (and pieached, let us iecall, to a specically Geiman audience), pio-
sciibes pleasuie of almost any soit. The humoi of Autc-da-Fe, iesting as it does on
the epistemological supeiioiity of the ieadei, would undoubtedly have placed
the novel beyond the pale of Adoinos conception of piopei liteiaiy modeinism.
Laughing was simply veiboten.
o_. Geoig evinces that second aspect of escapism aliated in the novel with
populai liteiatuie, namely iespectable liteiatuie as a pleasuiable, even eiotic,
foim of dissipation. Autc-da-Fe wiyly aligns the Lebemann Geoig with this ten-
dency, foi he is fiom the veiy beginning intioduced as someone seeking to cloak
his lecheiy with moie iespectable cultuial puisuits. The unpioblematic and un-
ciitical piocess of ieadeily identicationthe slipping in and out of ctional
chaiacteispiovides a kind of anesthetizing giatication that puiveys in the end
a sensual iefuge fiom, iathei than ciitical peispective on, the modein woild.
o. This fiequently quoted passage fiom Eliot has become a commonplace of
high modeinism, cited in Stevenson, Mcdernist Ficticn, :I:, McFailane, Mind
of Modeinism, 8_, and elsewheie. It oiiginally appeaied in Eliot, Ulysses, Oidei
and Myth.
o1is 1o v.cis I ,,:o : :,,
o,. Canetti iemaiks: Kant fangt Feuei, so hie dei Roman, hatte mich vei-
wustet zuiuckgelassen. Die Veibiennung dei Buchei wai etwas, das ich nicht vei-
geben konnte. . . denn in dei Bibliothek des Sinologen wai alles enthalten, was fui
die Welt von Bedeutung wai . . . und zuiuck blieb eine Wuste, es gab nun nichts
mehi als Wuste und ich selbst wai an ihi schuld. Denn es ist kein bloes Spiel, was
in einemsolchen Buch geschieht, es ist eine Wiiklichkeit, fui die man einzustehen
hat (Das Augenspiel, ,).
oo. Lukcs accuses the following intellectual tiinity of aiding and abetting the
modeinist cause in this way: Heideggei, Fieud, Beigson. Iionically, Lukcs pays
little attention in Ideology of Modeinism to the widei social conditions that
contiibuted to the iise of the depiivileged subject.
o,. Lukcs, Ideology of Modeinism, :o.
o8. Canetti, Das Augenspiel, oI.
o,. Das schaif Umiissene dei Figuien lag ihm (ibid., IIo).
,o. Ibid., Io:.
,I. Ibid., Io_, see also I:::_.
,:. Ibid., :,,, see also 8_.
,_. Indeed, the bulk of the foiegoing study should in fact alieady have demon-
stiated the utility of newei appioaches to modeinism, which Huyssen and Bath-
iick desciibe iathei succinctly as a move away fiom the isolated masteis of mod-
einism towaid histoiy and politics (Mcdernity and the Text, :). An oveiview of
this moie capacious (and evei expanding) view of modeinism can be found in
Helleis ieview New Life foi Modeinism, which discusses a numbei of ielevant
books on the topic.
,. Canetti, foi example, held his play Kcmcdie der Eitelkeit (published I,,o,
but wiitten alieady in I,_) to be eine legitime Entgegnung auf die Bucheivei-
biennung of May Io, I,__ (Das Augenspiel, II,, see also o:), iathei than an apo-
litical absuidist oi existentialist diama.
,,. This tendency is identied and iefuted in Doppleis Voi- und Gegen-
bildei.
,o. I piovide a moie ciitical assessment of these matteis, including a discussion
of the elusive mattei of Veiwandlung, in my End of Histoiy.
viviiocv.vuv
Adoino, Theodoi. Commitment (Adoino on Biecht). In Aesthetics and
Pclitics. The Key Texts cf the Classic Debate within German Marxism, edited
by Fiedeiic Jameson and tianslated by Fiancis McDonagh, I,,,,. London:
New Left Books[Veiso, I,,,.
-. Elias Canetti: Discussion with Theodoi Adoino. Thesis Eleven ,
(I,,o): II,.
Alexis, Willibald. Die Hcsen des Herrn vcn Bredcw. Vaterlandischer Rcman.
Leipzig: Insel, n.d. I,:o].
Andeison, Maik. Kafka and New Yoik: Notes on a Tiaveling Naiiative. In
Mcdernity and the Text. Revisicns cf German Mcdernism, edited by Andieas
Huyssen and David Bathiick, I:oI. New Yoik: Columbia Univeisity Piess,
I,8,.
Ainason, Johann P. Canettis Countei-Image of Society. Thesis Eleven ,
(I,,o): 8oII,.
Auei, Annemaiie. Ein Genie und sein SondeilingElias Canetti und die
Blendung. In Zu Elias Canetti, edited by Manfied Duizak, _I,_. Stuttgait:
Klett, I,8_.
Bahi, Heimann. Das uniettbaie Ich. In Zur Uberwindung des Naturalismus,
thecretische Schriften, :88,:;o, edited by Gotthait Wunbeig, I8_,:.
Stuttgait: W. Kohlhammei, I,o8.
Bainouw, Dagmai. Elias Canetti. Stuttgait: Metzlei, I,,,.
Baitsch, Kuit, and Geihaid Melzei, eds. Experte der Macht. Elias Canetti. Giaz:
Veilag Dioschl, I,8,.
Bathiick, David, and Andieas Huyssen. Modeinism and the Expeiience of
Modeinity. In Mcdernity and the Text. Revisicns cf German Mcdernism,
edited by Andieas Huyssen and David Bathiick, IIo. New Yoik: Columbia
Univeisity Piess, I,8,.
Bellei, Steven. Otto Weiningei as Libeial: In }ews and Gender. Respcnses tc
Ottc Veininger, edited by Nancy A. Haiiowitz and Baibaia Hyams, ,IIoI.
Philadelphia: Temple Univeisity Piess, I,,,.
-. Vienna and the }ews :8o,:;,8. A Cultural Histcry. Cambiidge:
Cambiidge Univeisity Piess, I,8,.
Benjamin, Waltei. Illuminaticns. Edited and intioduced by Hannah Aiendt,
tianslated by Haiiy Zohn. New Yoik: Schocken, I,o,.
:,8 : vi vii ocv.vuv
Beiing, Dietz. Der Name als Stigma. Antisemitismus im deutschen Alltag :8::
:;,,. Stuttgait: Klett-Cotta, I,88.
Beikeley, Geoige. Principles cf Human Kncwledge. Vol. I of The Vcrks cf Gecrge
Berkeley, Bishcp cf Clcyne, edited by A. A. Luce and T. E. Jessop. London,
I,8.
Beiman, Russell A. The Rise cf the Mcdern German Ncvel. Crisis and Charisma.
Cambiidge: Haivaid Univeisity Piess, I,8o.
Bettelheim, Biuno. The Uses cf Enchantment. The Meaning and Impcrtance cf
Fairy Tales. New Yoik: Vintage Books, I,,o.
Bischo, Alfons-M. Elias Canetti. Staticnen zum Verk. Fiankfuit am Main:
Petei Lang, I,,_.
Boichmeyei, Dietei. The Question of Anti-Semitism. In Vagner Handbcck,
edited by Uliich Millei and Petei Wapnewski, tianslated by John
Deathiidge, Ioo8,. Cambiidge: Haivaid Univeisity Piess, I,,:.
Boyle, Nicholas. Ait, Liteiatuie, Theology: Leaining fiom Geimany. In
Higher Learning and Cathclic Traditicns, edited by Robeit E. Sullivan. Notie
Dame: Univeisity of Notie Dame Piess, :ooI.
Biadbuiy, Malcolm, and James McFailane, eds. Mcdernism. A Guide tc
Eurcpean Literature, :8;o:;,o. I,,o. London: Penguin, I,,I.
Biadbuiy, Malcolm, and James McFailane. The Name and Natuie of
Modeinism. In Mcdernism. A Guide tc Eurcpean Literature, :8;o:;,o,
edited by Malcolm Biadbuiy and James McFailane, ,,,. London: Penguin,
I,,I.
Biennei, Michael. After the Hclccaust. Rebuilding }ewish Lives in Pcstwar
Germany. Piinceton: Piinceton Univeisity Piess, I,,,.
Bioch, Heimann. Die Schlafwandler. eine Rcmantrilcgie. I,_o_:. Vol. I of
Hermann Brcch. Kcmmentierte Verkausgabe, edited by Paul Michael
Lutzelei. Includes Pasencw, cder Die Rcmantik, Esch, cder Die Anarchie, and
Huguenau, cder Die Sachlichkeit. Fiankfuit am Main: Suhikamp, I,8o.
Bionfen, Elisabeth. Over Her Dead Bcdy. Death, Femininity and the Aesthetic.
New Yoik: Routledge, I,,:.
Biooks, Petei. Reading fcr the Plct. Design and Intenticn in Narrative. New Yoik:
Knopf, I,8.
Canetti, Elias. Der andere Prcze. Kafkas Briee an Felice. I,o8. Munchen: Cail
Hansei, I,8.
-. Das Augenspiel. Lebensgeschichte :;,::;,,. I,8,. Fiankfuit am Main:
Fischei Taschenbuch, I,88.
-. Die Blendung. I,_,. Fiankfuit am Main: Fischei Taschenbuch, I,,_.
Tianslated as Autc-da-Fe by C. V. Wedgwood, I,o. New Yoik: Faiiai,
Stiaus, Giioux, I,8.
-. Dramen. I,,o. Fiankfuit am Main: Fischei Taschenbuch, I,,8.
-. Elias Canetti: Discussion with Theodoi W. Adoino. Thesis Eleven ,
(I,,o): II,.
vi vii ocv.vuv : :,,
-. Das eiste Buch: Die Blendung. In Das Gewissen der Vcrte, :I,.
Fiankfuit am Main: Fischei Taschenbuch, I,8I.
-. Die Fackel im Ohr. Lebensgeschichte :;:::;,:. I,8o. Fiankfuit am
Main: Fischei Taschenbuch, I,8:.
-. Die Fliegenpein. Aufzeichnungen. Munich: Cail Hansei, I,,:.
-. Die gerettete Zunge. Geschichte einer }ugend. I,,,. Fiankfuit am Main:
Fischei Taschenbuch, I,,,.
-. Die gespaltene Zukunft. Munich: Cail Hansei, I,,:.
-. Das Gewissen der Vcrte. Essays. I,,o. Fiankfuit am Main: Fischei
Taschenbuch, I,8I.
-. Macht und Ubeileben. In Macht und Uberleben. Drei Essays, ,:.
Beilin: Liteiaiisches Colloquium, I,oI.
-. Masse und Macht. I,oo. Fiankfuit am Main: Fischei Taschenbuch,
I,8o.
-. Der Ohrenzeuge. Funfzig Charaktere. I,,. Fiankfuit am Main: Fischei
Taschenbuch, I,8_.
-. Die Prcvinz des Menschen. Aufzeichnungen :;::;,:. I,,_. Fiankfuit
am Main: Fischei Taschenbuch, I,,o.
-. Realismus und neue Wiiklichkeit. In Das Gewissen der Vcrte, ,:,,.
Fiankfuit am Main: Fischei Taschenbuch, I,8I.
-. Die Stimmen vcn Marrakesch. Aufzeichnungen nach einer Reise. I,o,.
Fiankfuit am Main: Fischei Taschenbuch, I,8o.
Clovei, Caiol. Men, Vcmen, and Chainsaws. Gender in the Mcdern Hcrrcr Film.
Piinceton: Piinceton Univeisity Piess, I,,:.
Cohn, Doiiit. Optics and Powei in the Novel. In Histcry and Literature.
Essays in Hcncr cf Karl S. Guthke, edited by William Collins Donahue and
Scott D. Denham, ,IIoo. Tubingen: Stauenbuig, :ooo.
-. Transparent Minds. Narrative Mcdes fcr Presenting Ccnscicusness in
Ficticn. Piinceton: Piinceton Univeisity Piess, I,,8.
Copleston, Fiedeiick. A Histcry cf Philcscphy. Vols. ,,. I,o_o. New Yoik:
Image[Doubleday, I,8,.
Cuitius, Mechthild. Kritik der Verdinglichung in Canettis Rcman Die
Blendung. Eine Sczialpsychclcgische Literaturanalyse. Bonn: Bouviei, I,,_.
Daiby, David. Esse Peicipi, Sein ist Wahigenommenweiden: Peiception and
Peispective in Beikeley and Canetti. Necphilclcgus ,, (I,,I): :,_:.
-. Structures cf Disintegraticn. Narrative Strategies in Elias Canettis Die
Blendung. Riveiside, Calif.: Aiiadne, I,,:.
Davis, Lennaid J. Resisting Ncvels. Ideclcgy and Ficticn. New Yoik: Methuen,
I,8,.
Denby, David. Leaining to Love Canetti: The Autobiogiaphy of a Dicult
Man. New Ycrker (_I May I,,,): IooI_.
Der gelbe Stern in Osterreich. Vol. , of Studia }udaica Austriaca. Edited by Kuit
Schubeit. Eisenstadt: Edition Roetzei, I,,,.
:oo : vi vii ocv.vuv
Dissingei, Dietei. Eistei Veisuch einei Rezeptionsgeschichte Canettis am
Beispiel seinei Weike Die Blendung und Masse und Macht. In Canetti lesen,
edited by Heibeit Gopfeit, ,oIo,. Munich: Hansei, I,,,.
-. Vereinzelung und Massenwahn. Elias Canettis Rcman Die Blendung.
Bonn: Bouviei, I,,I.
Doblin, Alfied. Berlin Alexanderplatz. die Geschichte vcm Franz Biberkcpf.
Edited by Weinei Stauachei. Zuiich and Dusseldoif: Waltei Veilag, I,,o.
-. Die Eimoidung einei Butteiblume. In Die Ermcrdung einer
Butterblume. Ausgewahlte Erzahlungen :;:o:;,o, edited by Waltei Muschg,
:,. Olten and Fieibuig im Bieisgau: Waltei Veilag, I,o:.
Donahue, William Collins. Die Blendung, I,_,. In Encyclcpedia cf German
Literature, edited by Michael Konzett, I:I,o,I. Chicago: Fitzioy Deaiboin,
:ooo.
-. Die Blendung: Elias Canettis Viennese Novel. Sprachkunst. Beitrage
zur Literaturwissenschaft _o.: (I,,,): :,,o.
-. Eigentlich bist du eine Fiau. Du bestehst aus Sensationen: Misogyny
as Cultuial Ciitique in Elias Canettis Die Blendung. Deutsche
Vierteljahrsschrift fur Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte ,I.
(Decembei I,,,): oo8,oo.
-. The End of Histoiy: Eschatology in Elias Canettis Masse und
Macht. In Fin de siecleFin du millenaire. Endzeitstimmungen in der
deutschsprachigen Literatur, edited by Helmut Koopmann and Hans-Joig
Knobloch. Tubingen: Stauenbuig, :ooI.
-. The Kiss of the Spidei Woman: Gotthelf s Matiicentiic Pedagogy
and Its Postwai Reception. German uarterly o,._ (I,,): _o:.
-. Masse und Macht, I,oo. In Encyclcpedia cf German Literature, edited
by Michael Konzett, I:I,_,,. Chicago: Fitzioy Deaiboin, :ooo.
Dopplei, Alfied. Die Thematisieiung dei Konveisation: Hugo von
Hofmannsthals Lustspiel Der Schwierige. In Virklichkeit im Spiegel der
Sprache. Aufsatze zur Literatur des :o. }ahrhunderts in Osterreich, o,,8.
Vienna: Euiopaveilag, I,,,.
-. Voi- und Gegenbildei (Gestalten und Figuien als Elemente dei Zeit-
und Lebensgeschichte in Canettis autobiogiaphischen Buchein). In Elias
Canetti. Lcndcner Sympcsium, edited by Adiian Stevens and Fied Wagnei,
__. Stuttgait: Veilag Hans-Dietei Heinz[Akademischei Veilag Stuttgait,
I,,I.
Dowden, Steven. Sympathy fcr the Abyss. A Study in the Ncvel cf German
Mcdernism. Kafka, Brcch, Musil and Thcmas Mann. Tubingen: Niemeyei,
I,8o.
Downing, Eiic. Repetition and Realism: The Ligeia Impulse in Theodoi
Stoims Vicla tricclcr. Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift fur Literaturwissenschaft
und Geistesgeschichte o,.: (I,,I): :o,_o_.
vi vii ocv.vuv : :oI
Diapei, Hal. Karl Marxs Thecry cf Revcluticn. : vols. New Yoik: Monthly
Review Piess, I,,,.
Duizak, Manfied. Zu Elias Canetti. Stuttgait: Klett, I,8_.
Eagleton, Teiiy. The Rise of English. In Literary Thecry. An Intrcducticn,
I,,_. I,8_. Minneapolis: Univeisity of Minnesota Piess, I,8,.
Ein Dichter gegen Macht und Tcd. Elias Canetti. Diiected by Wolfgang Lesowsky
and wiitten by Kiista Hausei and Wolfgang Lesowsky. Co-pioduction of
ORF, ZDF and SRG, I,8,. Rebioadcast August I,,.
Elbaz, Robeit, and Leah Hadomi. Elias Canetti, cr, the Failing cf the Ncvel. New
Yoik: Petei Lang, I,,,.
-. Text and Metatext in Canettis Fictional Woild. German uarterly
(I,,): ,:I__.
Elias Canettis Ccunter Image cf Scciety. Crcwds and Pcwer, Tctalitarianism,
Death, Transfcrmaticn. Special Issue of Thesis Eleven , (I,,o).
Eliot, T. S. Ulysses, Oidei and Myth. Dial ,, (I,:_): 8o8_.
Enzensbeigei, Hans Magnus. Elias Canetti: Die Blendung. Der Spiegel _:
(, August I,o_): 8,.
Essays in Hcncr cf Elias Canetti. Edited by Heibeit G. Gopfeit. New Yoik:
Faiiai, Stiaus, Giioux, I,8,. Tianslation, by Michael Hulse, of Huter der
Verwandlung. Beitrage zum Verk vcn Elias Canetti. Munich: Cail Hansei,
I,8,.
Fabian, Hans. Die Spiache bei Elias Canetti: Exil als Asyl. In Das Exilerlebnis.
Verhandlungen des vierten Sympcsium uber deutsche und csterreichische
Exilliteratur, edited by Donald G. Daviau and Ludwig M. Fischei, ,,,o.
Columbia, S.C.: Camden House, I,8:.
Falk, Thomas H. Elias Canetti. New Yoik: Twayne, I,,_.
Felman, Shoshana. Tuining the Sciew of Inteipietation. In Literature and
Psychcanalysis, The uesticn cf Reading. Otherwise, edited by Shoshana
Felman, ,:o,. Baltimoie: Johns Hopkins Univeisity Piess, I,8:.
Feiiaia, Jenna. Giotesque and Voiceless: Women Chaiacteis in Elias Canettis
Die Blendung. In Prcceedings and Ccmmentary. German Graduate Students
Asscciaticn Ccnference at New Ycrk University, edited by Patiicia Doykos
Duquette, Matthew Giin and Inike Lode, 8o,. New Yoik: n.p., I,,.
Fletchei, John, and Malcolm Biadbuiy. The Intioveited Novel. In Mcdernism.
A Guide tc Eurcpean Literature, :8;o:;,o, edited by Malcolm Biadbuiy and
James McFailane, _,I,. London: Penguin, I,,I.
Foell, Kiistie A. Blind Reecticns. Gender in Elias Canettis Die Blendung.
Riveiside, Calif.: Aiiadne, I,,.
-. Whoies, Motheis, and Otheis: Reception of Otto Weiningeis Sex and
Character in Elias Canettis Autc-da-Fe. In }ews and Gender. Respcnses tc
Ottc Veininger, edited by Nancy A. Haiiowitz and Baibaia Hyams, :,,,.
Philadelphia: Temple Univeisity Piess, I,,,.
:o: : vi vii ocv.vuv
Fontane, Theodoi. Willibald Alexis und sein Roman Die Hcsen des Herrn vcn
Bredcw. In Gesammelte Verke in vier Banden, edited by Kuit Schieineit,
:o_::. Guteisloh: Sigbeit Mohn, I,oI.
Foucault, Michel. Man and His Doubles. In The Order cf Things. An
Archeclcgy cf the Human Sciences, tianslated by A. Sheiidan. New Yoik:
Random House, I,,o.
Fieud, Sigmund. The Standard Editicn cf the Ccmplete Psychclcgical Vcrks cf
Sigmund Freud. : vols. Tianslated fiom the Geiman undei the geneial
editoiship of James Stiachey, in collaboiation with Anna Fieud, assisted by
Alix Stiachey and Alan Tyson. London: Hogaith Piess, I,,_,.
Fiiedlandei, Saul, ed. Prcbing the Limits cf Representaticn. Nazism and the
Final Scluticn. Cambiidge: Haivaid Univeisity Piess, I,,:.
Fiosh, Stephen. The Pclitics cf Psychcanalysis. An Intrcducticn tc Freudian and
Pcst-Freudian Thecry. New Haven: Yale Univeisity Piess, I,8,.
Gaidenei, Sebastian. Incuiable Delusions: The Uniesolved Conict between
Fieudians and Theii Foes. Times Literary Supplement ,o_, (:, Octobei
I,,,): ,.
Gast, Wolfgang. Der deutsche Geschichtsrcman im :;. }ahrhundert. Villibald
Alexis. Untersuchungen zur Technik seiner vaterlandischen Rcmane.
Fieibuig i. Bi.: Univeisitatsveilag Becksmann, I,,:.
Gay, Petei. Freud. A Life fcr Our Times. New Yoik: W. W. Noiton, I,88.
-. Freud, }ews and Other Germans. Masters and Victims in Mcdernist
Culture. New Yoik: Oxfoid Univeisity Piess, I,,8.
Gay, Ruth. The }ews cf Germany. A Histcrical Pcrtrait. Intioduction by Petei
Gay. New Haven: Yale Univeisity Piess, I,,:.
Gilbeit, Sandia M., and Susan Gubai. The Madwcman in the Attic. The Vcman
Vriter and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imaginaticn. New Haven: Yale
Univeisity Piess, I,,,.
Gilman, Sandei. Dierence and Pathclcgy. Sterectypes cf Sexuality, Race, and
Madness. Ithaca: Coinell Univeisity Piess, I,8,.
-. }ewish Self-Hatred. Antisemitism and the Hidden Language cf the }ews.
Baltimoie: Johns Hopkins Univeisity Piess, I,8o.
-. The }ews Bcdy. New Yoik: Routledge, I,,I.
Glasenapp, Gabiiele von. Aus der }udengasse. Zur Entstehung und Auspragung
deutschsprachiger Ghettcliteratur im :;. }ahrhundert. Tubingen: Niemeyei,
I,,o.
Gopfeit, Heibeit G., ed. Canetti lesen. Erfahrungen mit seinen Buchern. Reihe
Hansei I88. Munich: Cail Hansei, I,,,.
-. The Reception Histoiy of Auto-da-F: A Documentation. In Essays
in Hcncr cf Elias Canetti, edited by Heibeit G. Gopfeit and tianslated by
Michael Hulse, :8,_I,. New Yoik: Faiiai, Stiaus, Giioux, I,8,.
Giunbaum, Adolf. Letteis to the Editoi. New Ycrk Times Bcck Review
(:8 Decembei I,,8): :.
vi vii ocv.vuv : :o_
Gutting, Gaiy. French Philcscphy in the :oth Century. Cambiidge: Cambiidge
Univeisity Piess, foithcoming.
Hanisch, Einst. The Political Inuence and Appiopiiation of Wagnei. In
Vagner Handbcck, edited by Uliich Mullei and Petei Wapnewski, tianslated
by John Deathiidge, I8o:oI. Cambiidge: Haivaid Univeisity Piess, I,,:.
Hauptmann, Geihait. Bahnwarter Thiel. In Das Gesammelte Verk (Ausgabe
letzter Hand), I:::IoI. Beilin: Suhikamp, I,_.
Hellei, Scott. New Life foi Modeinism. Chrcnicle cf Higher Educaticn o.II
(, Novembei ,,): A:I:_.
Heiman, Judith Lewis. Father-Daughter Incest. Cambiidge: Haivaid Univeisity
Piess, I,8I.
Hindeibeigei-Buiton, Tania. The Quixotic in Canettis Die Blendung. Mcdern
Austrian Literature _[ (I,8_): Io,,o.
Hofmannsthal, Hugo von. Der Schwierige. In Gesammelte Verke in
Einzelausgaben. Lustspiele II, edited by Heibeit Steinei, I,_I. Fiankfuit
am Main: S. Fischei Veilag, I,,.
Hollingei, David A. The Knowei and the Aiticei, with Postsciipt I,,_. In
Mcdernist Impulses in the Human Sciences :8,o:;,o, edited by Doiothy
Ross, :o,_. Baltimoie: Johns Hopkins Univeisity Piess, I,,.
Holub, Robeit C. Reecticns cf Realism. Paradcx, Ncrm, and Ideclcgy in
Nineteenth-Century German Prcse. Detioit: Wayne State Univeisity Piess,
I,,I.
Huyssen, Andieas, and David Bathiick, eds. Mcdernity and the Text. Revisicns
cf German Mcdernism. New Yoik: Columbia Univeisity Piess, I,8,.
Huyssen, Andieas. After the Great Divide. Mcdernism, Mass Culture,
Pcstmcdernism. Bloomington: Indiana Univeisity Piess, I,8o.
-. The Vamp and the Machine: Fiitz Langs Metrcpclis. In After the
Great Divide, o,8I. Bloomington: Indiana Univeisity Piess, I,8o.
Hyams, Baibaia, and Nancy A. Haiiowitz. A Ciitical Intioduction to the
Histoiy of Weiningei Reception. In }ews and Gender. Respcnses tc Ottc
Veininger, edited by Nancy A. Haiiowitz and Baibaia Hyams, _:o.
Philadelphia: Temple Univeisity Piess, I,,,.
Jameson, Fiedeiic. Afteiwoid. In Aesthetics and Pclitics. The Key Texts cf the
Classic Debate within German Marxism, edited by Fiedeiic Jameson,
tianslated by Fiancis McDonagh, I,o:I_. London: New Left Books[Veiso,
I,,,.
-. Piesentation IV. In Aesthetics and Pclitics. The Key Texts cf the Classic
Debate within German Marxism, edited by Fiedeiic Jameson, tianslated by
Fiancis McDonagh, I:,o. London: New Left Books[Veiso, I,,,.
Jay, Maitin. Adcrnc. Cambiidge: Haivaid Univeisity Piess, I,8.
-. The Dialectical Imaginaticn. A Histcry cf the Frankfurt Schccl and the
Institute cf Sccial Research, :;:,:;,o. Boston: Little, Biown, I,,_.
Jayne, Richaid. Erkenntnis und Transzendenz. Zur Hermeneutik literarischer
:o : vi vii ocv.vuv
Texte am Beispiel vcn Kafkas Fcrschungen eines Hundes. Munich: Fink,
I,8_.
Johnston, William M. The Austrian Mind. An Intellectual and Sccial Histcry,
:88:;,8. Beikeley: Univeisity of Califoinia Piess, I,,:.
Kaes, Anton, Maitin Jay, and Edwaid Dimendbeig, eds. The Veimar Republic
Scurce Bcck. Beikeley: Univeisity of Califoinia Piess, I,,.
Kimball, Rogei. Becoming Elias Canetti. New Critericn ,.I (I,8o): I,:8.
Koopmann, Helmut, ed. Thcmas-Mann-Handbuch. Stuttgait: Kionei, I,,o.
Kiaus, Kail. Ei is doch e Jud. In Untergang der Velt durch schwarze Magie,
__I_8. Vol. 8 of Verke vcn Karl Kraus, edited by Heiniich Fischei. Munich:
Kosel, I,oo.
Kiumme, Detlev. Lesemcdelle. Elias Canetti, Gunter Grass, Valter Hcllerer.
Munich: Hansei, I,8_.
Langei, Lawience L. Admitting the Hclccaust. Ccllected Essays. New Yoik:
Oxfoid Univeisity Piess, I,,,.
-. The Hclccaust and the Literary Imaginaticn. New Haven: Yale
Univeisity Piess, I,,,.
Laplanche, J., and J.-B. Pontalis. The Language cf Psychcanalysis. Tianslated by
Donald Nicholson-Smith. New Yoik: W. W. Noiton, I,,_.
Lawson, Richaid H. Understanding Elias Canetti. Columbia: Univeisity of South
Caiolina Piess, I,,I.
Lessing, Theodoi. Der judische Selbstha. Beilin: Judischei Veilag, I,_o.
Lieweischeidt, Dietei. Ein Wideispiuch in dei Eizahlkonzeption von Elias
Canettis Die Blendung. Virkendes Vcrt :8 (I,,8): _,oo.
Livingstone, Rodney. Biechts Me-ti. A Question of Attitude. In Bertclt Brecht.
Centenary Essays, edited by Steve Giles and Rodney Livingstone, o:,_.
No. I of German Mcnitcr. Amsteidam: Rodopi, I,,8.
Loienz, Dagmai C. G. Elias Canetti: Masse und Macht und Die Blendung.
Bezuge zwischen Roman und Massentheoiie. Mcdern Austrian Literature
_[ (I,8_): 8I,I.
Lukcs, Geoig. Fianz Kafka oi Thomas Mann: In The Meaning cf
Ccntempcrary Realism, ,,:. London: Meilin, I,,:.
-. The Ideology of Modeinism. In The Meaning cf Ccntempcrary
Realism, I,o. London: Meilin, I,,:.
Lua, Radomi. Austrc-German Relaticns in the Anschluss Era. Piinceton:
Piinceton Univeisity Piess, I,,,.
McClelland, John. The Place of Canettis Crcwds and Pcwer in the Histoiy of
Westein Social and Political Thought. Thesis Eleven , (I,,o): Io:,.
McFailane, James. The Mind of Modeinism. In Mcdernism. A Guide tc
Eurcpean Literature, :8;o:;,o, edited by Malcolm Biadbuiy and James
McFailane, ,I,_. London: Penguin, I,,I.
Maia, Rousiley C. M. Elias Canettis Autc-da-Fe. Fiom the Antithesis of the
Ciowd-Man to the Madness of Powei. Thesis Eleven , (I,,o): :8_8.
vi vii ocv.vuv : :o,
Maichand, Suzanne L. Dcwn frcm Olympus. Archaeclcgy and Philhellenism in
Germany, :,,o:;,o. Piinceton: Piinceton Univeisity Piess, I,,o.
Mews, Siegfiied. An Un-Ameiican Biecht: German Pclitics and Scciety I_._
(Fall I,,,): oIo.
Miedei, Wolfgang. Spuien dei schwaizen Spinne: Elias Canetti und Jeiemias
Gotthelf. Sprachspiegel ,o (I,,): I:,_,.
Mcdern Austrian Literature. Special Elias Canetti Issue. Io._ (I,8_).
Moi, Toiil. Sexual/Textual Pclitics. Feminist Literary Thecry. I,8,. Repiint,
London: Routledge, I,88.
Mosei, Jonny. Die Katastiophe dei Juden in Osteiieich I,_8I,,ihie
Voiaussetzungen und ihie Ubeiwindungen. In Der gelbe Stern in Osterreich,
edited by Kuit Schubeit, o,I_. Eisenstadt: Edition Roetzei, I,,,.
Mullei, Uliich, and Petei Wapnewski, eds. Vagner Handbcck. Tianslated by
John Deathiidge. Cambiidge: Haivaid Univeisity Piess, I,,:.
Muiphy, Haiiiet. Canetti and Nietzsche. Thecries cf Humcr in Die Blendung.
Albany: State Univeisity of New Yoik Piess, I,,,.
Musil, Robeit. Die Verwirrungen des Zcglings Tcrle. I,oo. Repiint, Reinbek bei
Hambuig: Rowohlt, I,88.
Nattei, Wolfgang G. Literature at Var, :;::;o. Representing the Time cf
Greatness in Germany. New Haven: Yale Univeisity Piess, I,,,.
Obeischelp, Reinhaid, ed. Gesamtverzeichnis des deutschsprachigen Schrifttums
(GV) :;:::;o,. Vol. :. Veilag Dokumentation Munchen, I,,o.
Ollig, Hans-Ludwig. Der Neukantianismus. Stuttgait: Metzlei, I,,,.
Paal, Jutta. Die Figurenkcnstellaticn in Elias Canettis Rcman Die Blendung.
Wuizbuig: Konigshausen & Neumann, I,,I.
Panizza, Oskai. The Operated }ew. In The Operated }ew. Twc Tales cf Anti-
Semitism, edited and tianslated by Jack Zipes, ,,. New Yoik: Routledge,
I,,I.
Pankau, Johannes G. Koipei und Geist: Das Geschlechteiveihaltnis in Elias
Canettis Roman Die Blendung. Ccllcquia Germanica :_.: (I,,o): Io,o.
Peteisen, Caiol. Elias Canetti. Beilin: Colloquium, I,,o.
Piel, Edgai. Elias Canetti. Munich: C. H. Beck[edition text+kiitik, I,8.
Podei, Elfiiede. Spuiensicheiung: Otto Weiningei in dei Blendung. In
Blendung als Lebensfcrm. Elias Canetti, edited by Fiiedbeit Aspetsbeigei and
Geiald Stieg, ,,,:. Konigstein, Ts.: Athenaum, I,8,.
Potgietei, Johan. Elias Canetti: Individuum veisus Masse. Eine
spiachiealistische Veianschaulichung seinei Philosophie in Die Blendung.
Mcdern Austrian Literature :,._- (I,,): ,I8I.
Reed, Teience J. Dei Fall Wagnei. In Thcmas-Mann-Handbuch, edited by
Helmut Koopman, I:::. Stuttgait: Kionei, I,,o.
Reinhaiz, Jehuda, and Waltei Schatzbeig, eds. The }ewish Respcnse tc German
Culture. Frcm the Enlightenment tc the Seccnd Vcrld Var. Hanovei, N.H.:
Univeisity Piess of New England, I,8,.
:oo : vi vii ocv.vuv
Riednei, Nicola. Canettis Fischerle. eine Figur zwischen Masse, Macht und
Blendung. Wuizbuig: Konigshausen and Neumann, I,,.
Rilke, Rainei Maiia. Die Aufzeichnungen des Malte Laurids Brigge. I,Io. Vol. o
of Rainer Maria Rilke. Samtliche Verke. Edited by Einst Zinn. Fiankfuit am
Main: Insel, I,oo.
Ringei, Fiitz K. The Decline cf the German Mandarins. The German Academic
Ccmmunity, :8;o:;,,. I,o,. Repiint, Hanovei, N.H.: Wesleyan Univeisity
Piess, I,,o.
Robeits, David. Ciowds and Powei oi the Natuial Histoiy of Modeinity:
Hoikheimei, Adoino, Canetti, Aiendt. Thesis Eleven , (I,,o): _,o8.
Robeitson, Ritchie. Canetti as Anthiopologist. In Elias Canetti. Lcndcner
Sympcsium, edited by Adiian Stevens and Fied Wagnei, I_I,. Stuttgait:
Veilag Hans-Dietei Heinz[Akademischei Veilag Stuttgait, I,,I.
-. Jewish Self-Hatied: The Cases of Schnitzlei and Canetti. In
Austrians and }ews in the Twentieth Century. Frcm Franz }cseph tc Valdheim,
edited by Robeit S. Wistiich, 8:,o. New Yoik: St. Maitins Piess, I,,:.
Roche, Maik W. National Socialism and the Disintegiation of Values:
Reections on Nietzsche, Rosenbeig, and Bioch. }curnal cf Value Inquiry :o
(I,,:): _o,8o.
Rohl, John C. G. Wilhelm II.: Das Beste waie Gas. Die Zeit 8 (: Decembei
I,,): o.
Rosenfeld, Alvin H. A Dcuble Dying. Reecticns cn Hclccaust Literature.
Bloomington: Indiana Univeisity Piess, I,8o.
-. Thinking abcut the Hclccaust. After Half a Century. Bloomington:
Indiana Univeisity Piess, I,,,.
Rotenstieich, Nathan. Heimann Cohen: Judaism in the Context of Geiman
Philosophy. In The }ewish Respcnse tc German Culture. Frcm the
Enlightenment tc the Seccnd Vcrld Var, edited by Jehuda Reinhaiz and
Waltei Schatzbeig, ,Io_. Hanovei, N.H.: Univeisity Piess of New England,
I,8,.
Rothstein, Edwaid. Dieams of Disappeaiance: The Seciet Life of Elias
Canetti. New Republic :[_ (I,,o): ___,.
Russell, Petei. The Vision of Man in Elias Canettis Die Blendung. German
Life and Letters, n.s., I (I,,): :_,.
Ryan, Judith. The Vanishing Subject. Early Psychclcgy and Literary Mcdernism.
Chicago: Univeisity of Chicago Piess, I,,I.
-. Viennese Psychology and Ameiican Piagmatism. In Ficticns cf
Culture. Essays in Hcncr cf Valter H. Sckel, edited by Steven Taubeneck,
Io,8I. New Yoik: Petei Lang, I,,I.
Scheipe, Klaus R. The City as Naiiatoi: The Modein Text in Alfied Doblins
Berlin Alexanderplatz. In Mcdernity and the Text. Revisicns cf German
Mcdernism, edited by Andieas Huyssen and David Bathiick, Io:,,. New
Yoik: Columbia Univeisity Piess, I,8,.
vi vii ocv.vuv : :o,
Schmidt, Hugo. Naiiative Attitudes in Canettis Die Blendung. Mcdern
Austrian Literature _[ (I,8_): ,_Io,.
Schoiske, Cail E. Fin-de-Siecle Vienna. Pclitics and Culture. New Yoik:
Vintage[Random House, I,8I.
Schubeit, Kuit. Dei Weg zui Katastiophe. In Der gelbe Stern in Osterreich,
edited by Kuit Schubeit, _Ioo. Eisenstadt: Edition Roetzei, I,,,.
Schuiei, Einst. Nebeneinandei: Aspekte dei Kultui dei Weimaiei Republik in
Geoig Kaiseis Volksstuck I,:_. In Histcry and Literature. Essays in Hcncr
cf Karl S. Guthke, edited by William C. Donahue and Scott D. Denham,
_,,I,. Tubingen: Stauenbuig, :ooI.
Sebald, W. G. Kuizei Veisuch ubei System und Systemkiitik bei Elias Canetti.
tudes germaniques _, (I,8): :o8,,.
Sokel, Waltei H. The Ambiguity of Madness: Elias Canettis Novel Die
Blendung. In Views and Reviews cf Mcdern German Literature. Festschrift fcr
Adclf Klarmann, edited by Kail S. Weimai, I8I88. Munich: Delp Veilag,
I,,.
-. Elias Canetti. In Eurcpean Vriters. The Twentieth Century,
I:::oI,_. New Yoik: Chailes Sciibneis Sons, I,,o.
-. Zum Veihaltnis von Autobiogiaphie und Roman bei Elias Canetti. In
Ist Vahrheit ein Meer vcn Grashalmen? Zum Verk Elias Canettis, edited by
Joseph P. Stielka and Zsuzsa Szll, I,__. Bein: Petei Lang, I,,_.
Sontag, Susan. Mind as Passion. In Essays in Hcncr cf Elias Canetti, edited by
Heibeit G. Gopfeit, 88Io,. New Yoik: Faiiai, Stiaus, Giioux, I,8,.
Steinecke, Haitmut, ed. Thecrie und Technik des Rcmans im :o. }ahrhundert.
Tubingen: Niemeyei, I,,:.
Stevens, Adiian, and Fied Wagnei, eds. Elias Canetti. Lcndcner Sympcsium.
Vol. 8 of Publicaticns cf the Institute cf Germanic Studies, University cf
Lcndcn. Stuttgait: Veilag Hans-Dietei Heinz[Akademischei Veilag Stuttgait,
I,,I.
Stevens, Adiian. Cieating Figuies: Naiiative, Discouise and Chaiactei in Die
Blendung. In Elias Canetti. Lcndcner Sympcsium, edited by Adiian Stevens
and Fied Wagnei, Io,I8. Stuttgait: Veilag Hans-Dietei
Heinz[Akademischei Veilag Stuttgait, I,,I.
Stevenson, Randall. Mcdernist Ficticn. An Intrcducticn. Lexington: Univeisity
Piess of Kentucky, I,,:.
Stieg, Geiald. Canetti und Biecht odei: Es wiid kein iechtei Choi daiaus . . .
In Zu Elias Canetti, edited by Manfied Duizak, I_8,o. Stuttgait: Klett, I,8_.
-. Canetti und die Psychoanalyse: Das Unbehagen in der Kultur und Die
Blendung. In Elias Canetti. Lcndcner Sympcsium, edited by Adiian Stevens
and Fied Wagnei, ,,,_. Stuttgait: Veilag Hans-Dietei Heinz[Akademischei
Veilag Stuttgait, I,,I.
Swales, Maitin. The Pioblem of Nineteenth-Centuiy Geiman Realism. In
:o8 : vi vii ocv.vuv
Realism in Eurcpean Literature, edited by Nicholas Boyle and Maitin Swales,
o88. Cambiidge: Cambiidge Univeisity Piess, I,8o.
Szll, Zsuzsa. Elias Canetti. In Osterreichische Literatur des :o. }ahrhunderts.
Einzeldarstellungen, edited by Hanneloie Piosche, oI,,. Beilin: Volk und
Wissen, I,88.
Tatai, Maiia. The Hard Facts cf the Grimms Fairy Tales. Piinceton: Piinceton
Univeisity Piess, I,8,.
-. Lustmcrd. Sexual Murder in Veimar Germany. Piinceton: Piinceton
Univeisity Piess, I,,,.
-. Wie su ist es, sich zu opfein: Gendei, Violence, and Agency in
Doblins Berlin Alexanderplatz. Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift fur Literatur und
Geistesgeschichte oo._ (I,,:): ,I,I8.
Tatlock, Lynne. Willibald Alexis and Young Geimany: A Closei Look.
German Life and Letters, n.s., _ (I,8o8I): _,,,_.
-. Villibald Alexis Zeitrcman Das Haus Dusterweg and the Vcrmarz.
Fiankfuit am Main: Lang, I,8.
Theweleit, Klaus. Male Fantasies. : vols. Tianslated by Stephan Conway in
collaboiation with Eiica Caitei and Chiis Tuinei. Minneapolis: Univeisity of
Minnesota Piess, I,8,, I,8,.
Thomas, L. H. C. The Liteiaiy Reputation of Willibald Alexis as an Histoiical
Novelist. Mcdern Language Review , (I,,o): I,,:I.
Tietze, Hans. Die }uden Viens. GeschichteVirtschaftKultur. I,__. Himbeig
bei Wien: Wienei Veilag, I,8,.
Tiaveiso, Enzo. The }ews and Germany. Frcm the }udec-German Symbicsis tc
the Memcry cf Auschwitz. Tianslated by Daniel Weissboit. Lincoln:
Univeisity of Nebiaska Piess, I,,,.
Vaget, Hans R. Walsungenblut. In Thcmas-Mann-Handbuch, edited by
Helmut Koopman, ,,o8o. Stuttgait: Kionei, I,,o.
Volkov, Shulamit. The Dynamics of Dissimilation: Ostjuden and Geiman
Jews. In The }ewish Respcnse tc German Culture. Frcm the Enlightenment tc
the Seccnd Vcrld Var, edited by Jehuda Reinhaiz and Waltei Schatzbeig,
I,,:II. Hanovei, N.H.: Univeisity Piess of New England, I,8,.
Wagnei, Richaid. Der Ring des Nibelungen. Edited by Julius Buighold. I,I_.
Repiint, Mainz and Munich: Schott and Pipei, I,8I.
-. The Ring cf The Nibelung. Tianslated by Andiew Poitei, illustiated by
Eiic Fiasei. New Yoik: Noiton, I,,o.
Weinei, Maic A. Richard Vagner and the Anti-Semitic Imaginaticn. Lincoln:
Univeisity of Nebiaska Piess, I,,,.
Weiningei, Otto. Geschlecht und Charakter. Eine prinzipielle Untersuchung.
Vienna: W. Biaumullei, I,o_. Repiint, Munich: Matthes & Seitz, I,8o.
Weismanns Veisuch, Canetti in Deutschland duichzusetzen. Marbacher
Magazin __ (I,8,): :,,.
vi vii ocv.vuv : :o,
Weningei, Robeit. Zui Dialektik des Dialektiks im deutschen Realismus:
Zugleich Ubeilegungen zu Michail Bachktins Konzept dei Redevielfalt.
German uarterly ,: (I,,,): II,_:.
Weilen, Hans-Jakob. Naiiative Stiategies in Elias Canettis Die Blendung and
Masse und Macht. Ph.D. diss., Stanfoid Univeisity, I,88.
Widdig, Beind. Cultuial Dimensions of Ination in Weimai Geimany.
German Pclitics and Scciety _: (I,,): Io:,.
-. Elias Canetti und die Ination. Merkur II (I,,): ,8,,,.
-. Mannerbunde und Massen. Zur Krise mannlicher Identitat in der
Literatur der Mcderne. Opladen: Westdeutschei Veilag, I,,:.
Wol, Laiiy. Child Abuse in Freuds Vienna. Pcstcards frcm the End cf the Vcrld.
New Yoik: New Yoik Univeiisty Piess, I,,,.
Ying, Ning. China und Elias Canetti. In Ferncstliche Bruckenschlage. Zu
deutsch-chinesischen Literaturbeziehungen im :o. }ahrhundert, edited by
Adiian Hsia and Sigfiid Hoefeit, I,IoI. Bein: Petei Lang, I,,:.
Zipes, Jack, ed. and tians. The Operated }ew. Twc Tales cf Anti-Semitism. New
Yoik: Routledge, I,,I.
Zuideivaait, Lambeit. Adcrncs Aesthetic Thecry. The Redempticn cf Illusicn.
Cambiidge: MIT Piess, I,,I.
iiix
Abelaid, 8o
Abstiaction: avant-gaide, I8o, I8I,
logical, I8I
Abuse, child and spousal, I:_,
I,, I,o, I,:, IoI, :: (n. ,,). See
alsc Incest, Pfa, Benedikt: abuses
daughtei, Rape
Adoino, Theodoi W., xii, ,, ,, I,,
I,o, I,I, I,, I,o, I,,8:, I8,8o,
I8,, I88, I8,, I,o,I, I,,:oo, :oI,
:o:, :: (n. ,I), :,I (n. ::), :,:
,_ (n. ,), :,_ (n. ,_), :, (n. o:),
Nctes tc Literature, I,,, Dialectic cf
Enlightenment, I,,, I8o, I8I
Aestheticism, ,,
Alexis, Willibald (Wilhelm Haiing),
_, I,, ::, :,, I, :o, (n. I), :Io
(n. __), :I_ (nn. ,,, ,8), :_o (n. 8,)
The Trcusers cf Mr. Bredcw, I,:o,
:::, :o:,, :8, _:, __,, _,, ,,,
I,8, and sex, :I, anti-Semitism in,
:, _,o, plot of, ::o
Algei, Hoiatio, I:8
Allen, Waltei, II, _:
Anschlu, II
Anti-Semitism, I, :, I_, I,, _,o,
,,I, ,,, oI, Io,, III, III,, I:,,
I,:, :_o (n. :,), in Alexis, :, _,
o, coipoieal, II,, II8, I:o, I:_:,,
I:,, I:,, I_o, I_I, :_I (nn. _, _,),
Canetti chaiged with, I__o. See
alsc Fischeile, Siegfiied
Aquinas, Thomas, Io8
Aiendt, Hannah: Illuminaticns, :_I
(n. _,)
Atwood, Maigaiet, 8
Austiia, II, oo, oI, II_, II,, I,,, :oo,
:o, (n. o)
Baboon, The, II,, II8, I:8
Bahi, Heimann, o, I,_
Bakhtin, Mikhail, I_o
Balzac, Honoi de, I,, I, I8, :o:,
Ccmedie humaine, ,o
Bainouw, Dagmai, _I, _:, I,,
Baithes, Roland, ,, I,
Bathiick, David: Mcdernity and the
Text, I,,, :,, (n. ,_)
Beckett, Samuel, I8o, I8,, I88, I8,,
Ecce Hcmc, I8I8:
Bellei, Steven, o,, I,:, :I, (n. o),
::, (n. Io), Vienna and the }ews,
oI, II:
Benedikt, Fiiedl, xviii, I,
Benjamin, Waltei, II,, :_I (n. _,)
Benn, Gottfiied, I,I, Static Pcems, I,8
Bennett, William: Bcck cf Virtues, 8
Beig, Alban, :oo, :oI
Beigson, Henii, I,8, :,,o (n. ),
:, (n. oI), :,, (n. oo)
Beiing, Dietz, :_:__ (n. o)
Beikeley, Geoige, ,,, ,8, 8I, 8:,
8o8,, ,,, Ioo, Io,, ::o (n. 8),
Principles, 8,
Beiman, Maishall, :,o,I (n. Io)
Beiman, Russell, xii, :I: (n. ,:), The
Rise cf the Mcdern German Ncvel,
,_,
Bettelheim, Biuno, ,, The Uses cf
Enchantment, I,I
:,: : i iix
Bildung, :, Io,, Ioo, Io,, Io,, IIo, III,
II:, II8, II,, I:,, I_o, I_
Bindei, Hans, I88
Blinding, I, _,, 8,, 8,, I,, I,:
Blindness, I,,,o, I8o, :o
Blue Angel, The (lm), :Io (n. :8)
Boll, Heiniich, xi
Boyle, Nicholas, ::, (n. o)
Biadbuiy, Malcolm, I8,, I8o8,
Biecht, Beitolt, 8, I,:, I8o, I8:, I88,
I8,, :,I (n. ::), :,_ (n. ,_)
Bientano, Fianz, oo, ,88o, 8I, 8:, 8,,
8,, ,:, Io,, ::::_ (n. I,)
Bioch, Heimann, I, _, ,, I, I,, ,,
oI, ,,, ,,, ,8, I,o, I8,, I,_, :oo
:oI, :,_ (n. ,,), Pasencw, cder Die
Rcmantik :888, ,, 8I, The Sleep-
walkers, I,, and Fieud, I_,, IoI
Bionfen, Elisabeth, 8
Biooks, Petei, :o, (n. IoI)
Buddha, o,, o,, Io8
Buigei, Petei, xii
Busch, Wilhelm, :_I (n. __)
Canetti, Elias: Crcwds and Pcwer, xi,
_, , ,, o, 8, ,o, ,_, ,, 8,, I_,, I_8,
Io, I:, I,o, I,,, Io,, I,o, I,I
,:, :o,, ::I (n. ,I), :o (n. ,_),
autobiogiaphy of, xii, , I,, __,
,8, I_8_,, I,_, :o_, ::: (n. o),
:_o (n. :,), :_o_I (n. _o), back-
giound of, ,, The Play cf Eyes,
,Io, aitistic goals of, I8, I,, I
:, :oo, Jewish identity of, II,I,,
Realism and New Reality, :oI,
The Numbered, :o_, Vedding, :o_,
:o, Ccmedy cf Vanities, :o_, :,,
(n. ,), The Vcices cf Marrakesh,
:o_, on histoiians, :II (n. _8)
Cassiiei, Einst, ,,, ::o (n. ,I)
Chambeilain, Houston Stewait, I:o
Chiistianity, 8, I_o. See alsc New
Testament
Chiistian Socialists, II:
Civilization, Io,, Io,, Io,
Cixous, Hlne, ,
Clovei, Caiol, ,o
Cohen, Heimann, ,,, II:, ::o (n. ,I),
::, (n. Io)
Cohen, Waltei, :o8 (n. :,)
Cohn, Doiiitt, :I (n. 8,)
Committed ait, I8o, I8:
Confucius, o,, Io8
Copleston, Fiedeiick, Io, 8:, 8,,
,_,, ::: (n. 8)
Cox, Maiian Roalfe, :Io (n. :,)
Ciowd. See Canetti, Elias: Crcwds and
Pcwer, Kien, Geoig: and ciowd
Cultuie, I,, ,8, Io_, I,_, I,8, Fiench,
II, Io,, U.S., Io,, iise of, Io:, Io,,
Io,, fiagmentation of, I,,,,, I8,,
I8o, I,o, commeicial mass, I,,,
I8:, I88
Geiman, :, ,o, 8, :I, :, :,, ,,
,_, ,o, ,8, o,, 8, IoI, Io:, Io_, Io,
Ioo, Io,, IIII:, II,, I8,, :: (n. _:),
disintegiation ciisis of, ,,, Io,, Io8,
II:, I,,, idealism in, IoI, II:, I_I,
synthesis of, IIo, assimilation of
Jews into, II:, II_, :_ (n. o,), and
physicality, I:o, I::,
Daiby, David, _, I,, _o, ,,, 8:, ,o,
I,, ::o (n. 8)
Daiwin, Chailes, ,I
Davis, Lennaid, _:, _, _,, o, Resist-
ing Ncvels, I,, _o_I
Demociitus, 8,
Denby, David, xi, ,o, :o, (n. o)
Deiiida, Jacques, I,_
Dilthey, Wilhelm, ::o (n. ,I)
Dissingei, Dietei, ::, (n. _)
Doblin, Alfied: Berlin Alexanderplatz,
,, I,, o,, ,o, ,o, I8o, Muidei of a
Butteicup, oo
Dolezel, Lubomii, _o, 8o
i iix : :,_
Doiotheum, I,,
Dowden, Steven: Sympathy fcr the
Abyss, :o8 (n. :)
Downing, Eiic, ,o
Diapei, Hal, _8
Eagleton, Teiiy, :o, (n. II)
Egoism, o8, ,_, ,o, 8I
Eislei, Geoig: Ein Dichter gegen
Macht und Tcd, :o8 (n. :o)
Elbaz, Robeit, _
Eliot, T. S., I,, I,o, I,8,,, I8o, I,_,
I,8, :o:, :o, :, (n. I), :,o,I
(n. Io), :,I (n. :_), The Vaste Land,
I,_
Empiiicism, :, oooI, ,I, ,o,o
passim, ,,, Io, Io,, ::_ (n. :o),
::, (n. o)
Enlightenment, Io:, Ioo, Io8, II:, II,,
I8I, I8_, ::, (n. Io)
Enzensbeigei, Hans Magnus, xi, ,
I:, o
Epistemology, ,8, ___, _,, _o, o,
,, o, o_, o,, ,,, 8,, Io_, I,, I,o,
I8:8,, I8o, I88, I8,, I,I, I,_, I,,
I,o, :o_, :,,o (n. ), :,_ (n. ,o),
:, (n. o:)
Escapism, :, ,,, Io:. See alsc Liteia-
tuie, populai
Fabian, Hans, ::o (n. ,,)
Felman, Shoshana,
Femininity. See Gendei
Feminism: and liteiaiy ciiticism,
_, ,, ,, I:_, :I, (n. ,)
Feiiaia, Jenna, _, :I, (n. ,)
Fichte, Johann Gottlieb, ,, ,,
Fiist Republic (Austiia), II_, I,,
Fischeiin, __, 8, ,_, ,, ,,, ,,, and
Fischeile, ,,I, ,,, muidei of, ,o
,I, I_o, I__, and pathos, ,I, ,,, as
piize, ,,
Fischeile, Siegfiied, :, ,, and P. Kien,
_:__, 8,, Ioo, Ioo, III, II_, II
I,, II,, I:8:,, I,,, muidei of,
o, I:,:o, I:,, I__, I_,_o, and
misogyny, ,, oo, :I, (n. ,), ap-
peaiance of, ,, ,o, ,I, ,,, 8,, II_,
II, II,, II,I8, I:o:_, I:, I:,,
I:8, I:,, I_o_I, I___, I_,, :_I
(n. __), and Fischeiin, ,,I, ,,,
beating of, ,o, as steieotype, Ioo,
II_, II,, II,, II8, I:,, I:,, I:8_o, I_I,
:_I (nn. _I, __), and Pensionistin,
Ioo,, II,, II,, and assimilation,
II:, II_, II8I,, I_o_I, I__, I_,, :_I
(n. _I), :_o_, (n. 88), Jewish iden-
tity of, II_I,, I:,:8, I___, :_I
(n. _I), :_, (n. ,_), anti-Semitism
of, II,, II,, I:,:8, I_o, planned
Ameiican escape of, II8I,, I:,,
I:8, I_I, :_o (nn. 8o, 8,), name of,
II8:_, I:,, :_:__ (n. o), and
G. Kien, I:8, I__
Foell, Kiistie, _, oo, ,_, I,_, :I, (nn.
,, Io), Blind Reecticns, I, :II,
(n. o)
Fontane, Theodoi, ::, :,, ,o, I8_, E
Briest, :I, :o, (nn. I_, I)
Foucault, Michel, o,, ,, 8,, ,, I,,
::, (n. o), :,,o (n. )
Fiankfuit School, ,, : (n. ,)
Fieud, Sigmund, xii, I, o, I_, _,
, ,,, oo, oI, oo, ,, ,,, I_8, :,
(n. 88), :,, (n. oo), and Oedi-
pus complex, ,, I:, I,,, I,o,
I,:, I,o, I,I, :_,_8 (n. ), :I
: (n. ,), : (n. ,), Canetti
iesponds to, I_o, I_,:, I,,:,
I,,, Io,,:, :_,_8 (n. ), Grcup
Psychclcgy and the Analysis cf the
Egc, I_8, IoI, Beycnd the Plea-
sure Principle, II, Civilizaticn and
Its Disccntents, II, Io:, Io_, Io,,
and tiansfeience, I:, I,,, I,o,8,
:, : i iix
:, (n. 8o), :o, (n. IoI),
and sublimation, I:, Io:o, Io,,
Ioo, Io,, :o,, :, (n. Io,), and hys-
teiia, I,, I8, I,I, and incest, I,,
I8, I,o, :I (n. 8), :: (n. ,,),
Intrcductcry Lectures, I8, Studies
cn Hysteria, I8, Tctem and Tabcc,
I8, Io:, and mythology, IoI, Io:,
I,o, and theoiy of diives, Io_, Io,
:, (n. Ioo), and iepiession, Io,
Io,, :, (n. Io,), as misogynistic,
Io8o,
Fieytag, Gustav, ::, :,
Fiied, Eiich, I8o, :I, (n. :)
Fiiedlandei, Saul: Prcbing the Limits
cf Representaticn, :Io (n. _o)
Fiies, Maiilyn Silbey, ,o
Fiosh, Stephen, I,,, I,o, I,,, Io,,
Io,, Pclitics cf Psychcanalysis, :
(n. ,), :, (n. 8o), :, (n. I:,)
Fiye, Noithiup, ,
Gay, Petei, Io, I:,, I_,, II, Freud, }ews
and Other Germans, :_I (n. __), :__
(n. ,), :_, (nn. ,o, ,), Freud, :8
(n. I:o)
Gay, Ruth, II,
Gendei, o, ,, 8, ,I, ,_, I8,, and
complementaiity, ,o, steieotypes
of, ,,, ,o, ,,,,, oI, and insanity,
o8, and behavioi, o,,o, and
language, ,
Geoige, Stefan, ,,, I8:
Geimany, II_. See alsc Cultuie
Geiman
Gide, Andi, I,,
Gilbeit, Sandia M., o8
Gilman, Sandei, o, II,, I_o, :_I
(n. _)
Glasenapp, Gabiielle von: Aus der
}udengasse, :o, (n. Io)
God, o,, 8:, 8,, Io:, Io
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von: Faust,
Io,, Io8, I,:
Gompeiz, Theodoi, II:
Gotthelf, Jeiemias: The Black Spider,
,8
Gottsched, Johann Chiistoph, 8I, 8:
Goiilla man, oo, o,, ,o,I, ,:, ,_,
Ioo, Io_, I,I
Giass, Guntei Wilhelm, xi
Giimm, Biotheis, ,_
Giob, Heii (Mi. Biute), ,8, ,,, 8I, 8_,
8
Giolmann, Adolf von, :o
Giunbaum, Adolf, I,
Gubai, Susan, o8
Guthke, Kail, :Io (n. :,)
Gutting, Gaiy ::, (n. o)
Gymnasien, ,,, Io,, Io,
Hadomi, Leah, _
Hanisch, Einst, I:o
Hansei Veilag, II, I,
Haiing, Wilhelm. See Alexis, Wil-
libald
Haitung, Rudolf, II
Hauptmann, Geihait, I,_, Bahn-
warter Thiel, ,o,,
Hausen, Mullei von, :_ (n. o,)
Hegel, Geoig Wilhelm Fiiediich, ,8,
,,, :, (n. I)
Heideggei, Maitin, I,I, I,,, I,o, :,,
(n. oo)
Heine, Heiniich, II
Heiman, Judith Lewis, I8
Heimeneutics, __, _, _o, _,, ,8, I,,,
I8,
Histoiicism, I,8, :, (n. o:)
Hobbes, Thomas, 8,
Hoepnei, Jean, Io
Hofmannsthal, Hugo von: Der
Schwierige, ,, Lcrd Chandcs Brief,
I,, :,: (n. ,)
i iix : :,,
Hollingei, David, I, I,,,8
Holocaust, o, I_, I_,, I8o, I8I, :,
(n. o:)
Holocaust (television miniseiies),
I88
Homei, o,, Io8
Hoikheimei, Max: Dialectic cf En-
lightenment, I,,
Humanism, Io,8
Humboldt, Wilhelm von, Io8
Hume, David, ::_ (n. :o)
Huyssen, Andieas, xii, I88, Mcdernity
and the Text, I,,, :,, (n. ,_), After
the Great Divide, I,,
Ibsen, Heniik, I,_
Idealism, ,,, 88, ,,Ioo, Io:, Io, IIo,
Geiman, IoI, II:, I_I, ::, (n. o),
aesthetics of, I8I
Identication, II, _o, _I, _:, ___, ,_,
I,:, I,I, I888,, I,,, :III: (n. )
Incest, ,_,,, I_,, I8, I,, :Io
(n. :,), :I (n. o). See alsc Pfa,
Benedikt: abuses daughtei
Insanity, II, I:, o,o8, ,o, ,:,_, ,,,
I,,, and women, o8, ,:,_
Intellectualism, I_
Jagei, Weinei, :, Io,, IIo
James, Heniy, I,_
James, William, oo, ,,, 8,, ,o, Io,,
::_ (n. :o), :,,o (n. )
Jameson, Fiedeiic, I,, I,o, :,o (n. o)
Jay, Maitin, ,
Jesus, 8_, 8
Jews: identity of, ,, II:, II_I, ::,
(n. Io), assimilation attempts of,
II:, II_, II,, II8:o, I:,, I__, I_,, :__
(nn. ,, ,o), :_, (n. ,), and self-
loathing, II,I,, I:,:8, I_, :_o_I
(n. _o), :_, (n. ,o), Viennese, I:o,
and intia-Jewish debate, I:,, as
victims, I88. See alsc Judaism
Joyce, James, xii, I, Io, I,,, I,_, I,,,
I,,, :oo:oI, Ulysses, ,, I,8, Pcr-
trait cf the Artist as a Ycung Man,
I8,
Judaism, ,, heiitage vs. ieligion of,
II, II,I8, I:,. See alsc Jews
Judas, 8_, 8
Jung, Cail, oI, I,
Jungei, Einst, I,I
Kafka, Fianz, I,, I,8, I8I, I8, I8,
8o, I88, I8,, I,,, I,,, :o:, :o,, :o,
(n. o), ::::_ (n. I,), :,: (n. :),
In the Penal Cclcny, I8,, I,o
Kant, Immanuel, :, 8o, 8:, 88, ,,,
,8, Ioo, Io:_, Io8, IIo, III, II:,
I,o, ::, (n. Io). See alsc Neo-
Kantianism
Kant: as chaiactei name, ,o,,, ::,
(n. _)
Kien, Geoig, :_, o, ,, :o, o,, 8o, I,I,
I,:, and sex, :,_o, o, ,,, o,, ,o,
,,, I,8, ::, (n. I), :, (n. o_), and
liteiatuie, :,_o, o, :, (n. o_),
as naiiatoi, _o, oI, o8o,, I,,,
I8, :o,, appeal of, _I_:, __,
I, ,I, ,_, ,, I,,, I8_, I88, I,:, :I:
(n. ,:), and women, I, ,, o, ,,
o:o_, o8, ,,,, Iooo,, :I,:o
(n. ,,), and misogyny, I, ,, oo,
Ioo, Io8, and femininity, _, o, oI
o_, o,, ,o, ,I, ,:, ,_, ,, ::I (n. ,I),
and psychology, o,, o8o,, ,I
,_, ,, ,,, ,_, ,,, I,, and goiilla
man, o,, ,o,I, ,, ,_, ,,,, I,I,
I,,, :: (n. _:), tieats P. Kien, ,:,
I,_, I,,,, Io:o,, and Theiese,
,:, Ioo, Io8, and society, ,,,,
and philosophy, ,,, 8o, as empiii-
cist, ,I,:, ,, Io_, Io, Io,, I,:,
:,o : i iix
I,o, :: (n. _:), and Fischeile, I:8,
I__, and teimite paiable, I:, Io:
o,, I,o, as non-Fieudian, I,_, I,,
as Fieudian, I,_,: passim, I,8,
::o (n. 8:), and counteitiansfei-
ence, I,8, I,,, IoooI, Io:, and
ciowd, I,8oI, Io:, Io,oo, Io,, ::I
(n. ,I). See alsc Pfa, Benedikt:
and G. Kien
Kien, Petei, ,, o, ,, II, ,I, ,,, ,8, Ioo,
I8o, I,I, and Kant, :, ,o,8, ,,,
Io:, Io_, suicide of, I:I_, o, o,,
,_, I_,_o, and Alexis, I,:o, :I,
:o, ,,, I,8, and histoiy, :8:,, 88,
Io_, Io8, as naiiatoi, _o, _,_o,
o,, I8, I,,, :o,, and women, _,
,, o, ,,, Iooo,, and misogyny,
_, ,, o:, o,, Io:, I,,,, Io:, Ioo,
Io8, I,8, :I, (n. Io), iepulsiveness
of, ,,, as exile, ,,oo, as academic,
,,oo, oIo:, ,:, 8o, ,_, ,8, IIo,
I,:, I,,, ::I:: (n. ), ::o (n. ,),
and femininity, oIo:, o,, o,, ,I,
,_, inteipiets Theiese as text, o_
o,, ,:, ,_, 8o, imagines muidei
of Theiese, o,o,, I, and phi-
losophy, ,,, 8o, 8,8o, 88, ,I, ,,
II:, I:,, I,o, ::o (n. 8), :_
_, (n. o8), identity of, 8o8I, ,_,
self-mutilation by, 8o, as idealist,
,,Io, passim, I,:, and books,
IooIoI, Io:, ::, (n. I:), men-
tal libiaiy of, IoI, III, misieads
Fischeile and Pensionistin, Ioo,,
Io8, IIoII, I_,, anti-Semitism of,
II,I8, and sex, I,_,, blindness
of, I,o,,, I,8, I,,, :o:. See alsc
Fischeile, Siegfiied: and P. Kien,
Kien, Geoig: tieats P. Kien, Pfa,
Benedikt: and P. Kien, Theiese:
and P. Kien
Kieikegaaid, Soien, :, (n. I)
Kimball, Rogei, xii, I
Kiaus, Kail, II, II:
Kiaus, Oskai, ::: (n. ,)
Kiisteva, Julia, I,
LaCapia, Dominick, :o8 (n. :,)
Lang, Fiitz: Siegfried (lm), I:o
Langei, Lawience, I8o
Language, oo, ,o,I, ,:, ,, ,:, ,_,
,,, Io,, II,, I_o, I_I, I___, I,,
Ioo, Io,o8, I,I, :oI, :o_, :I, (n. ,),
::I (n. ,I), :_o (n. 8o), :_, (n. ,_)
Lawson, Richaid H., _
Lessing, Theodoi: }ewish Self-Hatred,
I:8
Lieweischeidt, Dietei, I8I,, I,
Liteiatuie, populai, I_, I8, I,, :o, ::,
_8, I, , ,o, I,:, I,8, and sex, :I,
:,_o, _I, and pleasuie, o, women
in, 8, o,
Locke, John, ::_ (n. :o)
Loienz, Dagmai C. G., :o8 (n. :_)
Luegei, Kail, II:
Lukcs, Geoig, xii, ,,, I,, I,,, I8,,
I8,, I,I:oo passim, :,I (n. ::),
:, (n. o:)
McFailane, James, I,_,, I,o, I,8,
I,,, I8,, I8o8,, I88, I,o, I,,, I,,,
I,,, :o:, :, (n. I), :, (n. o)
Mach, Einst, ,, oo, oI, ,,, 8,, 8,, ,I,
,_, I8o
Mahlei, Alma, :_o (n. :,)
Malik Veilag, I, :o8 (n. o)
Mann, Heiniich, :o:, The Blue Angel,
:Io (n. :8)
Mann, Thomas, ,, I, :8, :o:, :o,
(n. o), ::8:, (n. ,), :__ (n. ,o),
The Magic Mcuntain, :o:
Maichand, Susan, Io, Io8, Io,, IIo,
::8:, (n. ,)
Mateiialism, ,,, Io,, I,:
May, Kail, :_o (n. 8,)
Metamoiphosis. See Tiansfoimation
i iix : :,,
Metaphysics, ,,, 8,, 8,, ,, ,,
Michelangelo, Io8
Misogyny, I:, I_, _, ,o, 8,
,I, oo, oI, oo, II,, II8, I_,, I:_,
I,, Io,o8, I,:, :o, :I, (nn. ,,
Io), cultuial, ,, o,, Io8o,, I8,.
See alsc Kien, Geoig: misogyny of,
Kien, Petei: misogyny of
Modeinism, I,_, I,, I,o,,, I,88o,
I8_, I8,, I88, I8,, I,o, I,:, I,8, I,,,
:oI_, :o, :,I (n. :_), :,: (n. :)
Moiality, _8, 8:, 8, 8o
Moie, Thomas, Io8
Mosei, Jonny, I:,
Moses, o,
Mozait, Wolfgang Amadeus: The
Magic Flute, 8,, ,o
Muiphy, Haiiiet, I_
Musil, Robeit, xii, I, I,,, I,,, :oo
:oI, :o:, :o, (n. o), Die Ver-
wirrungen des Zcglings Tcrle, ,,
8I, I8o
Mythology, I,8,,
Naiiation, _o, _I, __8, oI, ,
8, ,,, ,,,8, ,,, o,, o8, o,, ,o, ,8,
II_, II,, I:,, I,, Io, I,o, I8_8,
I88, I,o, I,, I,o, :o_, :I, (n. ,)
Nationalism: Geiman, :,, I:o, iacist,
III, I:o
Nattei, Wolfgang, :,
Natuialism, ,o, ,,, ,8, I,_
Natuie, 8,
Nazis and Nazism, ,, Io, I:I_, I_,
I,I, I,:, :oI
Neoempiiicism. See Empiiicism
Neoidealism. See Idealism
Neo-Kantianism, :, ,8, 8o, ,o, ,,,
Io:_, Io, IIo, II:, I,o, ::I::
(n. ), ::, (n. o,)
Nestioy, Johann, II
New Ciiticism, I,, I,,, I8o, I,_
New ieality, I:
New Testament, ,, o:, Io,
Nietzsche, Fiiediich, II, I,I, :,,o
(n. )
Novels. See Liteiatuie, populai
Nuiembeig Laws, ,
Obeischelp, Reinhaid: Gesamtver-
zeichnis, :Io (nn. :I, :)
Objectivity, Io,, I,,, I,o
Ollig, Hans-Ludwig, Io, ::, (n. o,)
Oiigen, 8o
Paal, Jutta: Die Figurenkcnstellaticn in
Elias Canettis Autc-da-Fe, II_I,
:_o (n. :,)
Palace of Justice (Vienna), , I_,
Panizza, Oskai: Operated }ew, II,
Pensionistin, ,, ,, Ioo,, as Capi-
talist, II,, II,
Peiception. See Subjectivity
Pfa, Anna, _, 8, ,I, Io, I,I,:.
See alsc Pfa, Benedikt: abuses
daughtei
Pfa, Benedikt, I:, II8, Ioo, and
P. Kien, :,:8, ,o, o,, 88, I:,, I,,
I,, :oI (n. o), misogyny of,
,, ,,, oo, I_, abuses daughtei,
,_, ,,,, ,,, ,,, 8,, I_,, I,,
I,o, I,:, I,,, Io8, :_, (n. :,), :_,
o (n. _o), and Theiese, ,8, ,,,
I_, I, :I (n. o), :_: (n. I),
and G. Kien, 888,, I,, Io8, ::
(n. _:), :o (n. _,), as steieotype,
I_, I,I, psychodiama of, I,
Philology, o:o_, Io,, Io8, Io,, IIo,
II,, II8
Philosemitism, II,, I:8
Philosophy: Eastein, ,o,,, ::I::
(n. ), Westein, ,,,8, ,,, 8o, 8:,
8o, 8,, ,I, ,_,, ,,, Io_, Io,,
Io8, Io,, I,,,o, ::I:: (n. ), ::o
(n. 8)
Physics, ,8
:,8 : i iix
Plato, :__, (n. o8)
Podei, Elfiiede, o, :I, (n. o)
Poe, Egai Allan: Tell-Tale Heait,
I,
Pound, Ezia, ,, :oo
Powei, 8,, ,_, Io, I,o, I,I,:,
I8,, :II (n. _8), :_,_8 (n. ), of
psychoanalysts, I,_, I,o,8, IoI,
I,:
Pival, Jean, I:, I,8, I,,, Ioo, IoI,
Io:, I,o, ::o (n. 8:)
Piotagonists, I8o, I8,, I,o, I,, I,,,
:o,, :,: (n. ,)
Piussia, :,
Psychoanalysis, ,, I_,, Io, II, I,,
I,I, I,:, I,_, I,, I,,, I,o, I,,,8,
Io:, Io, Io,, I,o, I,I, : (n. ,).
See alsc Fieud, Sigmund
Psychology, o,, o8o,, ,I,_, ,8, ,,,
8o, 8I, ,I, ,:,_, Io,, I_,I, I,_,
I,, social, IoI, I,o
Public spheie, I,, I8,
Public things, I:
Pulvei, Max, I:
Raimund, Feidinand, II
Ranke, Leopold von, :o, :,
Rape, _
Rath, Emanuel, :o, :Io (n. :8)
Rathenau, Walthei, I:o, :_o (n. :,)
Realism: psychological, I_,, Io, I,_,
socialist, I,,, liteiaiy, I8_, I8, I,o,
I,,. See alsc Liteiatuie, populai
Reichnei, Heibeit, II
Reich-Ranicki, Maicel, I:, o, ,
Reinvention, ,
Riednei, Nicole, I_,, Canettis
Fischerle, :_I (n. _I), :_: (n. )
Rilke, Rainei Maiie, xii, I,o, :o:, The
Nctebccks cf Malte Laurids Brigge,
,, I,, 8I, 8,, I,8, I8o, :o:
Ringei, Fiitz K., Io_, Io
Robeits, David, Io,
Russell, Petei, 8,, I,o, :: (n. _)
Ryan, Judith, Io, o, ,8, ,,, 8o, 8:,
,,, ::: (nn. 8, Io, I:, I), :::
:_ (n. I,), The Vanishing Subject,
oooI
St. Stephen, Cathedial of, 8:, I,,
Saitie, Jean-Paul, I8o, :,I,: (n. _o),
:,:,_ (n. ,)
Saussuie, Feidinand de, o_, ,o, ,
Scheichen, Heimann, :oo
Schillei, Fiiediich, :, IoI, Io8, I_,, I8I,
:,I,: (n. _o)
Schmitt, Cail, I,I
Schnitzlei, Aithui, oI, Prcfesscr Bern-
hardi, III
Scholaiship, Io8, Io,
Scott, Sii Waltei, ::
Semiotics, o:, o,, o,, o8, I:,, I,, Io8
Sensation, ,8, ,,, Ioo. See alsc Sub-
jectivity
Sex and sexuality, :I, :, :o, :,_o,
_I, , o, ,_,, ,,, I,_,, Io,,
and muidei, o,oo, ,:, :I8I,
(n. o,), :I, (n. oo), sublimation of,
Io:oo
Sinclaii, Upton, I, :o8 (n. o)
Singei, Isaac Bashevis: Shcsha, ,8
Sinology, o:, Io,, Io8, ::I:: (n. )
Socialism, ,o
Society, ,o,I, :I: (n. ,), gioupings
in, o, awaieness of, I8, :I, _o, ,o,
,,, 88,, fiagmentation of, _I,
behavioi of, ,o,I, ,o, analysis of,
,, and libeiation, ,, conceins of,
,o, ,,, ,8, uniest in, 8I, ,,, Io,, I8,,
enviionment of, I:,, ieality of, I_,,
Io, I,I, IoIo:, I,:, I,:, I,_, I,,,
iise of, Io:, Io,, Io,
Socioeconomics, IoI, I,o, I,o, I,,,
:o:
i iix : :,,
Sokel, Waltei H., ,_, ,, :I: (n. ,:)
Sonne, Isaiah, ,Io, __, _, ,o, I_,
I_,, II, I,o
Sontag, Susan, I, _, :I, (n. ,)
Spideis, imageiy of, ,8,,
Spiegel, Der, , I:
Stais of Heaven (pub), ,o, Ioo, II_,
II
Stein, Adolf, :o, (n. I8)
Stevenson, Randall, I,, I,, :,_
(n. ,o), Mcdernist Ficticn, :,
(n. o)
Stewait, Pottei, oo, :IoI, (n. _8)
Stieg, Geiald, , II, Ioo, I_,, I,, Io_,
:, (n. Io,)
Stiindbeig, Auguste, I,_, Miss }ulie,
I8,
Subjectivity, o,, oooI, ,I, ,,,
passim, I,o, I,8, I8o,, passim,
:o_, :, (n. oI), male, oI, oo,
o,
Szondi, Petei, I8o
Tatai, Maiia, :Io (n. :,), The Hard
Facts cf the Grimms Fairy Tales,
,_,, :Io (n. :,), Lustmcrd, o,, oo,
:I8 (n. o,)
Tatlock, Lynne, :,, :o,Io (n. :o)
Theism, 8,
Theiese, I,:o, :o, _, _,, , ,, II,,
and P. Kien, I,:o, :I, :o, :,, o,
,o, ,,,o, ,,, o:, o_oo, ,:, 8:8,
8,, 8o, 88, 8,, ,,, IoI, Io:, Io,, I:,,
I,_, Io,, and sex, :I, :, :o, o, ,,
,,, ,,, ,8, 8I8:, and gendei, o,
8, as steieotype, ,,, ,o, ,,, ,8,,,
8:, 8_, II_, I_, and B. Pfa, ,8, ,,,
I_, I, :I (n. o), :_: (n. I), as
text, o_o,, ,:, madness of, o,o8,
and G. Kien, ,:, Ioo, Io8, subjec-
tivity of, 8I8:, 8_8, 8,, 8,, ,o,
,, I,,
Theiesianum, _, :8, IoI, Io,, I:,, I,
I,,, ::, (n. I:), :_: (n. I)
Theweleit, Klaus: Male Fantasies, :I,
(n. :)
Thiid Humanism, :, IIo
Thomas, L. H. C., ::, :,
Tiiesias, I,o, I,8, I8o, I8,, :o:, :o,
:,o (n. 8)
Tollei, Einst: Masse Mensch, Io,
Toynbee, Philip, III:
Tiansfoimation (Veiwandlung), ,, o,
_, I,o, I,I, I,:, :o,, :_,_8 (n. )
Tucholsky, Kuit, II,
Twain, Maik: Tcm Sawyer, :
Venus, IoI
Verwandlung. See Tiansfoimation
Vienna, _, I_, ,o, 8,, ,o, ,I, I:o, I:,,
I_,, I,, I,o, I,I, I,o,,, :oI, ::
(n. ,,)
Vitalism, Io8
Vulkan, IoI
Wagnei, Richaid, I:o, Ring cycle, II,,
I:_:,, Io8, :__ (n. ,), :___ (nn.
,o,,), :_ (nn. ,8-oI), German
Art and German Pclitics, I:o
Waldingei, Einst, _:
Webein, Anton, :oI
Wedgwood tianslation, xii, II, ,, 8I,
I_o, I:
Weimai Republic, II_
Weinei, Maic, I:,
Weiningei, Otto, ,o, ,o, ,o, ,I, I,:,
:I (n. o), Sex and Character, o,
,, oI, :_o_I (n. _o)
Weismann Veilag, II
Weifel, Fianz, ,, :oI
White, Hayden, :o
Wilhelm II, I:o
Winckelmann, Johann Joachim, Io8
Windelband, Wilhelm, ,,, ::o (n. ,I)
:8o : i iix
Wolf, Chiista, xi
Wol, Laiiy, I,o
Women. See Gendei, Insanity: and
women, Liteiatuie: women in,
Misogyny
Woolf, Viiginia, I,_, I,,
Woild Wai I, I:,, Io,, :__ (n. ,o), :_,
(n. ,,)
Woitiuba, Fiitz, I,o, :oo
Wundt, Wilhelm, ,8, 8o, 8I
Yeats, W. B., :o, (n. o)
Yitzchak, Abiaham ben. See Sonne,
Isaiah
Young Geimany, _8
Zola, mile, I, I8_
Zuckmayei, Cail, ,
Zuideivaait, Lambeit, I,8
Zweig, Stefan, ,, II, :oI
0ivivsi1v oi ov1u c.voii.
s10iiis i 1ui civm.ic i.c0.cis
.i ii1iv.10vis
Fcr cther vclumes in the Studies see p. ii.
Seveial out-of-piint titles aie available in limited quantities thiough the
0cscii oce. Oideis foi these titles only should be sent to Editoi, 0cscii,
cv#_Ioo, Dey Hall, Chapel Hill, NC :,,,,_Ioo. They include:
__ w.vi woiiviiv. Christian Reuters Schelmusky. Intrcducticn and
English Translaticn. I,o:. Pp. xii, Io.
,8 w.i1iv w. .vi1, v.0i w. vvosm. ,v., iviiivic i. coii, .i
wiviv v. iviiivicu, iis. Studies in Histcrical Linguistics in Hcncr cf
Gecrge Sherman Lane. I,o,. Pp. xx, :I.
o8 ,ou i0v.0iv. Bifccal Visicn. Ncvalis Philcscphy cf Nature and Disease.
I,,I. Pp. x, I,o.
,o io.ii i. iiso. Pcrtrait cf the Artist as Hermes. A Study cf Myth and
Psychclcgy in Thcmas Manns Felix Krull. I,,I. Pp. xvi, Io.
,: cuvis1ii oiv1ii s,ocvi. The Marble Statue as Idea. Ccllected Essays
cn Adalbert Stifters Der Nachscmmer. I,,:. Pp. xiv, I:I.
,_ io.ii c. i.vi.0 .i ,ov0 v. ,ous, iis. The Ccrrespcndence cf
Schnitzler and Auernheimer, with Racul Auernheimers Aphcrisms. I,,:.
Pp. xii, IoI.
, .. m.vc.vi1 .vi1 m.iii0c. The Laxdcela Saga. Its Structural
Patterns. I,,:. Pp. xiv, :oI.
,, ,iiiviv i. s.mmos. Six Essays cn the Ycung German Ncvel. :nd ed.
I,,,. Pp. xiv, I8,.
,o io.ii u. cvosvv .i ciovci c. scuooiiiiii, iis. Studies in the
German Drama. A Festschrift in Hcncr cf Valter Silz. I,,. Pp. xxvi, :,,.
,, ,. w. 1uom.s. Tannhauser. Pcet and Legend. With Texts and Tianslation
of His Woiks. I,,. Pp. x, :o:.
8o io.ii c. i.vi.0 .i ciovci ,. v0iiow. The Ariadne auf Naxcs cf
Hugc vcn Hcfmannsthal and Richard Strauss. I,,,. Pp. x, :,.
8I ii.ii i. voiv. Rainer Maria Rilke. Duinesian Elegies. Geiman Text
with English Tianslation and Commentaiy. :nd ed. I,,,. Pp. xii, I,_.
8: ,.i x. vvow. Gcethes Cyclical Narratives. Die Unterhaltungen
deutscher Ausgewanderten and Vilhelm Meisters Vanderjahre. I,,,.
Pp. x, I.
8_ iiov. ximmicu. Scnnets cf Catharina vcn Greienberg. Methcds cf
Ccmpcsiticn. I,,,. Pp. x, I_:.
8 uivviv1 w. viicuiv1. Friedrich Nietzsches Impact cn Mcdern German
Literature. I,,,. Pp. xxii, I:,.
8, ,.mis c. oii.uiv1v, 1imo1uv i. siiiiv, .i voviv1 m. uiims,
iis. Studies in Nietzsche and the Classical Traditicn. :nd ed. I,,,. Pp. xviii,
:,8.
8, u0co vixxiv. Friedrich vcn Hausen. Inquiries intc His Pcetry. I,,,. Pp. x,
I,,.
88 u. c. u0i11icu. Theater in the Planned Scciety. Ccntempcrary Drama in
the German Demccratic Republic in Its Histcrical, Pclitical, and Cultural
Ccntext. I,,8. Pp. xvi, I,.
8, io.ii c. i.vi.0, ii. The Letters cf Arthur Schnitzler tc Hermann Bahr.
I,,8. Pp. xii, I8_.
,I iii.i v. vuiivs .i .. 1iio .i1, iis. Creative Enccunter. Festschrift
fcr Herman Salinger. I,,8. Pp. xxii, I8I.
,: vi1iv v.0i.i. Gerhart Hauptmanns Befcre Daybreak. Tianslation and
Intioduction. I,,8. Pp. xxiv, 8,.
,_ miviii1u iii. Studies in Gcethes Lyric Cycles. I,,8. Pp. xii, I,I.
, ,ou m. iiiis. Heinrich vcn Kleist. Studies in the Character and Meaning
cf His Vritings. I,,,. Pp. xx, I,.
,, covio vivviii. The Bcundless Present. Space and Time in the Literary
Fairy Tales cf Ncvalis and Tieck. I,,,. Pp. x, Io_.
,, ivu.vi iviiivicusmiviv. Die satirische Kurzprcsa Heinrich Bclls. I,8I.
Pp. xiv, ::_.
,8 m.viiv ,ous vi.cxwiii, ii. Structures cf Inuence. A Ccmparative
Apprcach tc August Strindberg. I,8I. Pp. xiv, _o,.
,, ,ou m. sv.iix .i voviv1 i. viii, iis. Exile. The Vriters
Experience. I,8:. Pp. xxiv, _,o.
Ioo voviv1 v. iw1o. Ycur Diamcnd Dreams Cut Open My Arteries. Pcems
by Else Lasker-Schuler. Tianslated and with an Intioduction. I,8:. Pp. x,
_I,.
IoI wiiii.m sm.ii. Rilke-Kcmmentar zu den Aufzeichnungen des Malte
Laurids Brigge. I,8_. Pp. x, I,,.
Io: cuvis1. woii cvoss. Magister ludens. Der Erzahler in Heinrich
Vittenweilers Ring. I,8. Pp. xii, II:.
Io_ ,.mis c. oii.uiv1v, 1imo1uv i. siiiiv, .i voviv1 m. uiim,
iis. Studies in Nietzsche and the }udaec-Christian Traditicn. I,8,. Pp. xii,
_,_.
Io, ,ou w. v. ciivi. The Merchant in German Literature cf the
Enlightenment. I,8o. Pp. xv, I,_.
Ioo s1ivui ,. x.viowi11. The Enncbling Pcwer cf Lcve in the Medieval
German Lyric. I,8o. Pp. vii, :I:.
Io, vuiiiv 1uomso. The Pcetry cf Brecht. Seven Studies. I,8,. Pp. xii, :I:.
The following titles aie in piint and can be oideied fiom the Univeisity of
Noith Caiolina Piess, P.O. Box ::88, Chapel Hill, NC :,,I,-::88.
Io8 cisii. vi11-m.0cuiv. E. T. A. Hcmanns Marchenschaen. Kaleidcskcp
der Verfremdung in seinen sieben Marchen. I,8,. Pp. xii, :_.
Io, c.ii x. u.v1. Readers and Their Ficticns in the Ncvels and Ncvellas cf
Gcttfried Keller. I,8,. Pp. xiv, I.
IIo m.vi. v. svivvivc-mcq0ii. The German Pcetry cf Paul Fleming.
Studies in Genre and Histcry. I,,o. Pp. xvi, :o.
III i.vii vvici. The Pclitical Dramaturgy cf Niccdemus Frischlin. Essays cn
Humanist Drama in Germany. I,,o. Pp. xii, I,:.
II: m.vx w. vocui. Gcttfried Benns Static Pcetry. Aesthetic and
Intellectual-Histcrical Interpretaticns. I,,I. Pp. xiv, I:_.
II_ ,.mis .. v.vi1i, ,v., vicu.vi ivicu scu.ii, .i ciovci c.
scuooiiiiii, iis. Literary Culture in the Hcly Rcman Empire, :,,,:,:o.
I,,I. Pp. xiv, :,o.
II ,iii .i xow.iix. The Pcetics cf Histcrical Perspectivism. Breitingers
Critische Dichtkunst and the Necclassic Traditicn. I,,:. Pp. xvi, I,o.
II, .i. c. iiiiiv. The Impatient Muse. Germany and the Sturm und
Drang. I,,. Pp. xiv, I,o.
IIo civuiii scuoiz wiiii.ms .i s1ivu. x. scuiiiiv, iis.
Kncwledge, Science, and Literature in Early Mcdern Germany. I,,o. Pp. xii,
_I:.
II, vi1iv v. ivsv.miv. The Elusiveness cf Tclerance. The }ewish uesticn
frcm Lessing tc the Napclecnic Vars. I,,,. Pp. xiv, I,:.
II8 iiiis suooxm.. Ncble Lies, Slant Truths, Necessary Angels. Aspects cf
Ficticnality in the Ncvels cf Christcph Martin Vieland. I,,,. Pp. xiv, :o.
II, v.vv.v. .. iiiii. Language, Literature, and the Negctiaticn cf
Identity. Fcreign Vcrker German in the Federal Republic cf Germany. I,,,.
Pp. xvi, I,o.
Infoimation foi authois and a complete list of titles can be obtained fiom
the Editoi oi fiom the depaitmental site on the Woild Wide Web
(http:[[www.unc.edu[depts[geiman[index.htm).